We could always make a run at Roy Williams. He should be unemployed by the end of the year based on UNC's results.
How to "start over"?
- Thread starter dbronco7sc
- Start date
We could always make a run at Roy Williams. He should be unemployed by the end of the year based on UNC's results.
Automatic extensions are fine.... as long as they are based on the success of the men's basketball program. Extensions based on Jiri driving the wrong car? Too stupid and incompetent to even consider.
As a basketball fan I am sure you know that Coaches getting 3-year extensions before they coach a basketball game based on very minor NCAA transgressions from the previous coaching staff is an extreme rarity in NCAA basketball. Gmac is the only coach I have ever heard of getting that sweet deal (though I am sure there has to be a couple more out there in all of the NCAA).
Disagreed with you on the other thread, 22; agree with you here that it wouldn't be a good idea. It is too big of a gamble. Let 'em walk before you need them to run. I would support them if they were our selected our coach. (I'm pretty sure you weren't saying you wouldn't support them after they got the job.)
We could always make a run at Roy Williams. He should be unemployed by the end of the year based on UNC's results.
Sounds great
Yep. In all honesty, I think Freddie could be a GREAT hire. But he needs to cut his teeth somewhere and get back into the college game. And of course get the right guys on the bench with him - as you pointed out.
We know the fan base would explode. We know he almost certainly wouldn't jump ship to a better job. Only thing we don't know is can he deliver the players and get it done on the court.
Sounds great
Now we are talking....
It would be a big gamble though, because if he didn't pan out it would be the exact same situation as McDermott except everyone would feel 10x worse about it.
That doesn't mean mid-major coaches can't succeed here. That just means we picked the wrong coach. There have been lots of great successes - do you think Bo Ryan, Matt Painter, or Bruce Weber wouldn't have won here?
Hiring an assistant from a big-time school is a much bigger risk than a mid-major HC, IMO.
The simple answer is to pony up the money to hire a "name" coach. But my guess is that will take $1.5+ million.
We all keep hearing "we don't have the money" to do that. But our budget has nearly doubled in the past 10 years and yet we are paying our current basketball coach less now than we were 10 years ago. Where is all of the "extra" money going?
We all keep hearing "we don't have the money" to do that. But our budget has nearly doubled in the past 10 years and yet we are paying our current basketball coach less now than we were 10 years ago. Where is all of the "extra" money going?
Exactly... its not like every mid-major coach (or assistant or big name coach) is the same guy.
Very true. It seems like D-I assistants are there for one reason - to recruit. While this is obviously a necessary part of any program, a recruiter is not necessarily the person you want leading your program. It seems like head coaches start at a lower level and work their way up, but are always head coaches. I'm sure there are plenty of exceptions to this - I can think of several off the top of my head in fact. But in general, successful head coaches rose up the ranks as head coaches from a lower level, rather than as assiatants at a D-I program.
How is it a "bigger" risk?
I suppose you could throw Wayne Morgan on that list too - probably for both sides of the arguement however.
Biggest knock on all the mid-majors we've seen around here is that the "can't get it done at this level". I think many will say that the actual "work" on many ball clubs is done by the assistants anyway. Certainly that's the case in recruiting - which is half the battle at ISU.
Sure all mid-majors aren't the same guy. Don't really see how all assistants ARE? At least these guys would have major conference experience - again, which has been the top knock on the recent batch of Iowa coaches
We lose the two best players on the team next year. We are already starting over.
Painter played at Purdue, then was a coach at Purdue for one year before taking over.
Bruce Weber was an assistant at Purdue for 18 years.
Bo Ryan was an assistant at Wisconsin for 18 years.
Each of these men had significant experience in a major conference, either playing in one or coaching in one, before they became a coach at a major conference school. In these cases, that experience happened to come in the same conference where they got their head coaching jobs, which is a big plus.
I made a post last year about the Big 12 and Big Ten head coaches. All but a couple of them have major conference playing or coaching experience in their background.
The "big risk" comes in hiring an assistant that has no major conference experience whatsoever. Which is exactly what ISU did when it hired McDermott. It's clear that this lack of experience has hurt McDermott. He didn't understand the talent level required for the Big 12, he doesn't understand the physicality required for the Big 12 (or if he does understand it, he can't communicate it to the players), and it just goes on from there.
If there is a new MBB coach at ISU, and if that coach doesn't have major conference experience somewhere in the resume, whoever hired this coach should be summarily fired.
Last edited:
There are certainly successes - and failures - from both types of backgrounds. I was objecting to you writing off mid-major HC's from our candidates list. I'm not writing off all assistants (as you are writing off all mid-major head coaches), just saying the body of work is not as strong, and it's a bigger risk.
That can't be true - he was as assistant under two coaches, Yoder and Cofield - who were both fired, and Ryan was not then retained. Maybe seven years, not 18...
