ISU, Men's Basketball Coach Greg Lansing Part Ways After 11 Seasons

WANTED: Passionate Sycamore Fanatics. That You?

Register NOW to join our community of die-hard Sycamore fans.


Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
I haven't had time to read through the different threads so I don't know what's been said. From my perspective parting ways with Coach Lancing was the correct choice. Clinkscales makes is a compelling argument, and ultimately the type of decision making that has any potential for success. I can't weigh Clinkscales's ability at finding the right replacement, I don't know anything about that, but based on his decision to let Lancing go after back to back wining seasons indicates courage, and the type of forethought necessary for any chance at success. It all boils down between the the 2 year vs 1 year extension, and how that would play out for the institution that is ISU basketball compared to how it would play out for the coach as an individual. If Lancing believed that the sophomore class could elevate him to the next level or allow retirement with legacy, Lancing was clearly looking out for only Lancing. The one year extension offered him continued employment, and still left Clinkscales room for maneuver. By insisting on a 2 year extension Lancing was taking that away. It would have been very easy for Clinkscales to have agreed and make the easy choice without rocking the boat. Not willing to rock the boat is the type of thinking that has cast the net of mediocrity over ISU for decades. It is now up to Clinkscales to capitalize on what Lancing has left him, no different then Lancing capitalizing on what MaKenna left for Lancing. It is my wish that a young dynamic coach sees an opportunity to prove himself, and build where Lancing left off. It may take more then one coaching change to do it, but without willing to accept change and the desire to win ISU will never grow. Clinkscales has made that gamble. If Clinkscales's gamble blows up in his face ISU doesn't really drop that far, but if he pulls it off, ISU gains everything.
 
I haven't had time to read through the different threads so I don't know what's been said. From my perspective parting ways with Coach Lancing was the correct choice. Clinkscales makes is a compelling argument, and ultimately the type of decision making that has any potential for success. I can't weigh Clinkscales's ability at finding the right replacement, I don't know anything about that, but based on his decision to let Lancing go after back to back wining seasons indicates courage, and the type of forethought necessary for any chance at success. It all boils down between the the 2 year vs 1 year extension, and how that would play out for the institution that is ISU basketball compared to how it would play out for the coach as an individual. If Lancing believed that the sophomore class could elevate him to the next level or allow retirement with legacy, Lancing was clearly looking out for only Lancing. The one year extension offered him continued employment, and still left Clinkscales room for maneuver. By insisting on a 2 year extension Lancing was taking that away. It would have been very easy for Clinkscales to have agreed and make the easy choice without rocking the boat. Not willing to rock the boat is the type of thinking that has cast the net of mediocrity over ISU for decades. It is now up to Clinkscales to capitalize on what Lancing has left him, no different then Lancing capitalizing on what MaKenna left for Lancing. It is my wish that a young dynamic coach sees an opportunity to prove himself, and build where Lancing left off. It may take more then one coaching change to do it, but without willing to accept change and the desire to win ISU will never grow. Clinkscales has made that gamble. If Clinkscales's gamble blows up in his face ISU doesn't really drop that far, but if he pulls it off, ISU gains everything.

Basic math... this year's Soph class will be finishing their JR season has LanSing (note the S, not c) looking for another 1-yr extension for the Soph class to finish.

Given that McKenna was a .453 coach at the div I level and Lansing is a .525 coach... more than capitalized

No college head coach at Div II and ESPECIALLY at div I can work w/ no additional contract years; the opposing coaching will ALWAYS use that as a recruiting tool AGAINST you

Hit a Home Run Sherard!

Oops -- You were a pitcher... Let's HOPE this isn't a Gopher ball
 
I haven't had time to read through the different threads so I don't know what's been said. From my perspective parting ways with Coach Lancing was the correct choice. Clinkscales makes is a compelling argument, and ultimately the type of decision making that has any potential for success. I can't weigh Clinkscales's ability at finding the right replacement, I don't know anything about that, but based on his decision to let Lancing go after back to back wining seasons indicates courage, and the type of forethought necessary for any chance at success. It all boils down between the the 2 year vs 1 year extension, and how that would play out for the institution that is ISU basketball compared to how it would play out for the coach as an individual. If Lancing believed that the sophomore class could elevate him to the next level or allow retirement with legacy, Lancing was clearly looking out for only Lancing. The one year extension offered him continued employment, and still left Clinkscales room for maneuver. By insisting on a 2 year extension Lancing was taking that away. It would have been very easy for Clinkscales to have agreed and make the easy choice without rocking the boat. Not willing to rock the boat is the type of thinking that has cast the net of mediocrity over ISU for decades. It is now up to Clinkscales to capitalize on what Lancing has left him, no different then Lancing capitalizing on what MaKenna left for Lancing. It is my wish that a young dynamic coach sees an opportunity to prove himself, and build where Lancing left off. It may take more then one coaching change to do it, but without willing to accept change and the desire to win ISU will never grow. Clinkscales has made that gamble. If Clinkscales's gamble blows up in his face ISU doesn't really drop that far, but if he pulls it off, ISU gains everything.
That was a well thought out post. Don't necessarily agree, but kudos for bringing it.
 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
Reading these comments makes me LOL. You all need to get back to reality when it comes to ISU. If we can finish above .500 in football or basketball we are having a good year and I don't expect that to change anytime soon. Rip me all you want, but that's the facts.
 
I watched all I needed to see in that 18 minute video. Clink is all talk. Nothing will change. "The new coach will understand the challenges" is another way of saying that we'll still be underfunded compared to everyone else, while we overspend in football.
 
For what this is worth: I recently wrote about my experiences shadowing Daniel Bradley near the end of his presidency and then Deborah Curtis sometime during the first week of hers. I have thought about both of those days as each bit of drama (homecoming, the logo fiasco, and now this) has unfolded. Curtis killed my piece. It never ran. She replaced it with a piece written by her secretary... er... I mean her "chief of staff." My former editor left ISU about 18ish months ago, solely because of Curtis. And now STATE Magazine has even been wiped off of the internet.
I love my school. I was an equipment manger for the football team, and I've written about it more than once. It breaks my heart watching Curtis' leadership style slowly rip the place apart.
I know nothing about Lansing or Clinkscales (my former editor tells me Clinkscales is incompetent). But I DO know Curtis. Well... I know what it's like to cross Curtis, even when you think you're not crossing her.
I thought about cancelling my ISU license plate. I still have it. My love for the school ranks above my loathing for her.
 
Curtis and Clink both seem incompetent to me. She's been here for 3 years and he's been here 5 years. I'm not even going to discuss the other sports or things going on at ISU, but they haven't done a thing for basketball. Bradley got the money for the HC, and they paid for a new ugly logo to put at center court. They've both had 3 years to try to fund basketball the right way and we're not a step closer now than we were 3 years ago.
 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
I care. And if you don’t think LaRavia has a tremendous upside then we have zero common ground for discussion
Works for me, and we will see if he has A TREMENDOUS UPSIDE, and that is whether he stays or goes. His challenge is, he only has two years left to get TREMENDOUS!
 
For what this is worth: I recently wrote about my experiences shadowing Daniel Bradley near the end of his presidency and then Deborah Curtis sometime during the first week of hers. I have thought about both of those days as each bit of drama (homecoming, the logo fiasco, and now this) has unfolded. Curtis killed my piece. It never ran. She replaced it with a piece written by her secretary... er... I mean her "chief of staff." My former editor left ISU about 18ish months ago, solely because of Curtis. And now STATE Magazine has even been wiped off of the internet.
I love my school. I was an equipment manger for the football team, and I've written about it more than once. It breaks my heart watching Curtis' leadership style slowly rip the place apart.
I know nothing about Lansing or Clinkscales (my former editor tells me Clinkscales is incompetent). But I DO know Curtis. Well... I know what it's like to cross Curtis, even when you think you're not crossing her.
I thought about cancelling my ISU license plate. I still have it. My love for the school ranks above my loathing for her.
Come out the gates swinging. Welcome to the site.
 
End of an era. We can debate how long that era should have lasted, but it was a successful one in a lot of ways.

I care very, very much about winning between the lines; however, Greg Lansing won in many ways off the court by leading this team with class and coaching some very fine young men. These kids graduated and generally stayed out of trouble. Hardly a sniff of controversy over 11 years, which is saying a lot. The other thing I give him credit for - he kept his players. Players like Scott, Barnes, Key, etc. could have definitely transferred and played “up” a level, but they all chose to stay and commit to ISU for the entirety of their careers. Look around the rest of the Valley; that’s rare.

I am trying to be optimistic about the future, but it’s hard to do at the moment. We shouldn’t fear change or fear the consequences of being bold, but despite what Clink may have said today our issues are real and they are difficult to overcome. If I’m in line for the job I of course tell him I’m up for the task, but until you’re in it how can one fully understand?

Will be interesting to see how the next month or so shakes out. Clink isn’t “kind of on the clock” like he said today, he’s DEFINITELY on the clock.
 
For what this is worth: I recently wrote about my experiences shadowing Daniel Bradley near the end of his presidency and then Deborah Curtis sometime during the first week of hers. I have thought about both of those days as each bit of drama (homecoming, the logo fiasco, and now this) has unfolded. Curtis killed my piece. It never ran. She replaced it with a piece written by her secretary... er... I mean her "chief of staff." My former editor left ISU about 18ish months ago, solely because of Curtis. And now STATE Magazine has even been wiped off of the internet.
I love my school. I was an equipment manger for the football team, and I've written about it more than once. It breaks my heart watching Curtis' leadership style slowly rip the place apart.
I know nothing about Lansing or Clinkscales (my former editor tells me Clinkscales is incompetent). But I DO know Curtis. Well... I know what it's like to cross Curtis, even when you think you're not crossing her.
I thought about cancelling my ISU license plate. I still have it. My love for the school ranks above my loathing for her.
This school needs more people like you. I’ll keep an open mind with Clinkscales, but hearing your (and others) experience with Curtis just pisses me off.
 
For what this is worth: I recently wrote about my experiences shadowing Daniel Bradley near the end of his presidency and then Deborah Curtis sometime during the first week of hers. I have thought about both of those days as each bit of drama (homecoming, the logo fiasco, and now this) has unfolded. Curtis killed my piece. It never ran. She replaced it with a piece written by her secretary... er... I mean her "chief of staff." My former editor left ISU about 18ish months ago, solely because of Curtis. And now STATE Magazine has even been wiped off of the internet.
I love my school. I was an equipment manger for the football team, and I've written about it more than once. It breaks my heart watching Curtis' leadership style slowly rip the place apart.
I know nothing about Lansing or Clinkscales (my former editor tells me Clinkscales is incompetent). But I DO know Curtis. Well... I know what it's like to cross Curtis, even when you think you're not crossing her.
I thought about cancelling my ISU license plate. I still have it. My love for the school ranks above my loathing for her.
Certainly speaks volumes!
 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
This school needs more people like you. I’ll keep an open mind with Clinkscales, but hearing your (and others) experience with Curtis just pisses me off.
I too am trying to keep my opinions on Clinkscales open. Anyone can look pretty awful if they're working under leadership that hamstrings them. Thanks for your comment. My best to you.
 
Was I the only one confused by the story about the extension/non-extension? Lansing wanted two years, ISU offered one, but then said they didn't keep him because he wouldn't be here for five to seven years? I could have read that wrong, but that's what it sounded like. And it makes no sense. Not that it really matters at this point.
 
Was I the only one confused by the story about the extension/non-extension? Lansing wanted two years, ISU offered one, but then said they didn't keep him because he wouldn't be here for five to seven years? I could have read that wrong, but that's what it sounded like. And it makes no sense. Not that it really matters at this point.
You didn't read it wrong. Clink wants someone who'll be here for 5-7 years (his words) and he also said it's not a bad thing for a mid-major to be a stepping stone job....which negates a coach being here 5-7 years. Not to mention, ain't no new coach being offered a 5-7 year contract at ISU who isn't named Larry Bird.

Add our three confirmed transfer players so far.....it's a total sh** show at this point.
 
You didn't read it wrong. Clink wants someone who'll be here for 5-7 years (his words) and he also said it's not a bad thing for a mid-major to be a stepping stone job....which negates a coach being here 5-7 years. Not to mention, ain't no new coach being offered a 5-7 year contract at ISU who isn't named Larry Bird.

Add our three confirmed transfer players so far.....it's a total sh** show at this point.
That 5-7 year line is even weirder because it's not like Lansing is old. If he were employed by ISU for the next 7 years, he would be 60 years old at the end of the contract. (I wouldn't advocate for that, I'm just making the point.)

I'm also not sure the report that ISU offered a one-year extension has been verified. I believe Greg Semmler tweeted it out, but no one has corroborated the report.
 
Back
Top