[Cracked Sidewalks] Cottingham details 'the process'

[Pardner]

This is not a knock on Buzz-----but it's nonsense to give him the ultimate credit for initially signing TT.

TT signed because he wanted to play for Crean------Buzz was nothing more than the contact or go between guy at MU. The proof is that if TT was so enamored with Buzz, he would not have asked for his release.

Murf--I said Buzz recruited TT and closed the deal...not that TT didn't sign up to play for TC--chicken or egg?.   The question at hand was who Buzz recruited at MU.  Buzz was the lead recruiter with TT and most of the class--plus EW.   Some of you act like all Buzz was doing was recording stats at the end of the bench last season--and refuse to give him any credit for recruiting a Top 20 class to MU--which he put together, at that time, in four months on the job as an assistant.  The continuing angst about him is really ridiculous.

From Rosiak: 
"Taylor informed Buzz Williams of his commitment in person Monday at St. Anthony's, news that prompted a hug from MU's newest assistant."

and this snippet:

"Taylor is the highest-profile East Coast recruit to commit to MU during Crean's tenure."


The whole saga of his release request (or lack of one) where the high school AD filled out the release form is another issue.  As to who "asked for the release", the drama at the Hurley High Alter should show us who was pulling the strings.  This episode lies in the dark side of college sports today.  And, TT soooo wanted to play for Crean that he chose sitting on the bench at Kansas vs. starting at IU, right? 

[Marquette84]

The non-answer answer is an interesting route for someone like you to take.

I'll take that as meaning you see no value in a coaching interview; consider Athletic Directors who do interviews to be wasting their time and resources; and would prefer that AD's simply watch a coach on the sideline for a few games and then hire him (without needing to meet them first of course).

Non-answer?  What in the world are you talking about?  I'm the one who asked the question!  You're the one who responded a non-answer

I asked specifically what could a guy like Lowry or Brownell could say during an interview that would convince you that he's not another Bob Dukiet.

You responded that looking a person in the eye and shaking his hand was important.  Fine.  I merely pointed out that Bob Dukiet passes your test.

If you want to try again, tell me exactly what Brad Brownell or Chris Lowry could say during an interview that could convince you that they are fully capable.  


***I'll take that as meaning you see no value in a coaching interview; consider Athletic Directors who do interviews to be wasting their time and resources; and would prefer that AD's simply watch a coach on the sideline for a few games and then hire him (without needing to meet them first of course).

Wrong.

I said: "The only thing you need from an interview is whether you can stand working with the guy."

Apparently, you also think that the eye-contact and hand shaking is important. 

But you can't elaborate on what a mid-major coach could actually SAY during an interview that would convince you that he can do what he's never done. 

So let's start with Brad Brownell

--undergrad at DePauw
--1 years as an Evansville assistant
--2 years as a University of Indianapolis assistant
--8 years as a UNC-Wilimington assistant
--4 years as UNC-Wilimington HC
--2 years as a Wright State HC

I think we'd both agree that Brownell has never recruited or coached a player that would be minimally capable of helping MU succeed in the Big East.  I think we'd both agree that Brownell has never worked or played in a program with the type of expectations that come with the MU job.  So it truly is a stretch for Brownell to take this job.  MU hasn't actually seen Brownell in practice or how he recruits.  MU has no idea how much or how little Brownell is willing to travel.  I think we'd both agree that Brownell has never had the type of recruiting budget that he'd have at MU. 

If it were me, I'd dismiss him without an interview as unqualified.

However, you think he deserves an interview.  Fine.

So, with that background, what are the questions that you, as and AD would have lined up that would help you prove that he's a better pick than Buzz Williams (who you've already seen on the recruiting trail, working with alums and boosters, preparing for Big East-level games, and coaching players during practices--and concluding that he's qualified).   

I'll give you the assumption that Brownell has a good handshake.  What do you ask next?

[ChicosBailBonds]

It was embarrassing DURINJG the process.  And this National Coach of the Year was their 4th choice?  5th Choice?  How good could he be?  He coached one season without his recruits.  He is as big of a risk as Buzz.  Afterall, they both have one the same number of NCAA tournament games.

I think you meant "won".

Davis won a conference championship, a conference tournament championship and went to OT in the NCAAs and lost on a miracle shot to a Sweet 16 team.

He was down their list on choices because they went for regional guys first, along with one of their own...an alum.  They had Ford until OSU said, don't take the job because we'll pay you 3X the amount. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

Buzz has shown he can recruit and coach at Marquette as an assistant.  The other candidates hadn't shown that can recruit or coach at MU's level.  Period.

Do you think it's fair to compare an assistant coach's ability to recruit to a Big East school while a Big East assistant vs a head coach at a mid major?  Let's face it, top talent is going to go to the top schools in major conferences because of who the schools are, of course the mid major coaches aren't going to be able to bring in those types of kids.  But let's reverse it....would that assistant coach if he went to a mid major be able to get top talent....highly unlikely.  Could that mid major coach moving up to a high major get top talent now that he has the resources and the school brand with him....reasonably likely, certainly more then the other way around!

[ChicosBailBonds]

Well, perhaps you're glad that MU took time to look Bob Dukeit in the eye, shake his hand, and get a feel for him in person.

Dukiet was hired by Hank Raymonds....nuff said.  Hank is a great guy, wonderful man but he was always destined to be a great assistant coach, not a great head coach and not a great AD.  That might piss some people off, but that is reality.

[Murffieus]

Pardner------so you're saying that TT didn't stay with Buzz because Hurley talked him out of it. Well if Hurley was "pulling the strings" when they asked for release, which might be the case------then you can bet that Hurley was pulling the strings when TT originally signed with MU.

In either case the only thing that changed was that Crean left------so obviously Crean was the key figure in the original signing and in the decision to ask for the release from his commitment from MU.

I repeat------Buzz was nothing more than Crean's gopher in the TT/Hurley relationship with MU. That's what an assistant's job ordinarily is-----a gopher-----the only exception being if an assistant comes into a program and brings along a guy who he has an established previous relationship with (Fulce).

The reason the player signs is to play for the HC-----he doesn't sign because the assistant coach is a likeable smooth talker-----that may bring the recruit through the door and into the picture-----but the HC has to seal the deal or it's going to be a revolving door!

[jce]

So you're saying Marquette hired Buzz based on his experience? His work history? That's just laughable. MU fell for the very "smooth talk" you just described.

He might be the best guy in the world, but he's simply not qualified to be a Big East head coach, particularly at a school that could be top 15 nationally next year.

But again, just because you have a problem with Buzz doesn't mean the process was bad.  If the same process resulted in Bennett or Few or Miller, no one would be bitching.  However, if they actually brought in five coaches for thorough interviews, and they still hired Buzz, you people would be bitching about something else.

[Pakuni]

But let's reverse it....would that assistant coach if he went to a mid major be able to get top talent....highly unlikely.  Could that mid major coach moving up to a high major get top talent now that he has the resources and the school brand with him....reasonably likely, certainly more then the other way around!

Huh? A major conference assistant couldn't recruit at a mid-major level?

I guess that's why Bruce Weber had such trouble landing talent at Southern Illinois.
Or why Bruce Pearl didn't land any good players at UWM.
And why John Pelfrey couldn't get it done at South Alabama.
Kevin Stallings obviously couldn't recruit while at Illinois State.
Jeff Capel, Anthony Grant ... shall I continue?

I swear ... where do you come up with this stuff?

On the other hand, the high-major college basketball landscape is littered with the corpses of former top mid-major coaches who couldn't succeed at the next level because of recruiting deficiencies or simply because they got in over their head.
Mike Deane. Dan Monson. Tim Welsh. Jeff Lebo. Again ... shall I continue?

Obviously there are good and bad examples from both categories, but it is flat-out ludicrous to suggest that high-major assistant coaches cannot recruit as head coaches at the mid-major level.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Huh? A major conference assistant couldn't recruit at a mid-major level?

I guess that's why Bruce Weber had such trouble landing talent at Southern Illinois.
Or why Bruce Pearl didn't land any good players at UWM.
And why John Pelfrey couldn't get it done at South Alabama.
Kevin Stallings obviously couldn't recruit while at Illinois State.
Jeff Capel, Anthony Grant ... shall I continue?

I swear ... where do you come up with this stuff?

On the other hand, the high-major college basketball landscape is littered with the corpses of former top mid-major coaches who couldn't succeed at the next level because of recruiting deficiencies or simply because they got in over their head.
Mike Deane. Dan Monson. Tim Welsh. Jeff Lebo. Again ... shall I continue?

Obviously there are good and bad examples from both categories, but it is flat-out ludicrous to suggest that high-major assistant coaches cannot recruit as head coaches at the mid-major level.

I said a high-major assistant isn't going to land top top talent at a mid major because it's a mid-major.

People are penalizing mid major head coaches because they don't lure in 4 and 5 star players which is silly.  4 and 5 star players want to play at high major schools, so assistants at those high majors have the advantage of selling that high major brand that the mid majors don't.

My point is that it's a lot easier for a mid major head coach to recruit better as a high major head coach, then it would be for a high major assistant (who has the luxury of selling the level of school he is at) to go down to a mid major and try to get that same talent.

The kids go to the program and the level of the program....a mid major is ALWAYS going to be at that disadvantage.  Did those coaches you cite have some good players...yes, but not many that were highly rated.  I believe 84's assertion was that many of these mid-major head coaches hadn't proven they could recruit at the level of a high major...well it's a self-fullfilling prophecy because most high major players don't want to play at a mid major.

As for the failures you cited by mid majors going to a major...look at your paragraph prior to show many that succeeded at the high major level.  Monson also inherited a disaster at Minnesota but still got to the NCAAs.  Mike Deane got to the NCAAs. Tim Welsh got to the NCAAs.  Were they successful....no as they were fired, but they also delivered in some years as well.  They were proven enough commodities to do that. I'd have listed many of the mid majors that did well like Al McGuire, Bruce Pearl, Bo Ryan, Bruce Weber, Ben Howland, Mike Montgomery, Billy Donovan, Bill Self, Jim Calhoun, Lute Olson, Thad Matta, Billy Gillespie, Coach K, John Caliprari....shall I continue?  Many many many successful head coaches at the highest level cut their teeth running mid majors first.  And of course there are many assistant coaches that were promoted up like an Izzo, Williams, Dixon, etc....but most were at the same school many years which is usually a constant with those successful coaches.

Now list all those assistants with a losing record as a head coach that have succeeded in their second chance...I'm sure there are ton you can come up with there too.     As for your over the head comment...I spoke to three current assistant coaches that know Buzz very well....those same words you used came right out of their mouths....they also said they like the guy, thinks he works hard and hopes he can overcome the doubts they have.  Go figure.  Let's hope they're wrong.

Please, next time read what I actually said in the initial post...thank you....it will help your case greatly. 

[Gato78]

Dukiet was hired by Hank Raymonds....nuff said.  Hank is a great guy, wonderful man but he was always destined to be a great assistant coach, not a great head coach and not a great AD.  That might piss some people off, but that is reality.

Hank did not hire Dukiet. Hank's guy was Mike Newell. When Newell took a pass, Hank offered to coach for one year on an interim basis. The Athletic Board had power in those days and decided not to take Hank up on that offer. MU then turned to Dukiet, in many respects because Billy Packer recommended him (Billy was at the height of his "popularity"). I think it is totally wrong to hang Dukiet on Hank. I think the (thankfully) now defunct Athletic board is responsible.

[nola03]

I'd prefer not to get too much into the Buzz hiring because 84, Pakuni, and others will continue to hammer home their viewpoint that MU did everything right and myself, Chicos and others will continue to ask questions of MU and wonder if Cottingham was overwhelmed. This won't change for the next 3 years during Buzz' tenure.

All I'll say is if I was doing the interviewing I imagine when I asked Buzz Williams about his playing style and philosophy and he answered, "I have a winning style and would need some time to familiarize myself with what we have before deciding on a system" (from Bob McClellan's Yahoo/Rivals article) that would leave me a tad uneasy and wouldn't let me in good faith sell the continuity argument to the public. I mean, the guy has been with us for 9 months and he doesn't know what he has? Didn't we hire him because he was supposed to be familiar with our current team?

I find it disconcerting that Buzz can't explain his philosophy to a writer in better terms then the bolded quote above. Over the last month, when friends, co-workers, and acquaintances ask how MU will play under the new coach it's a little embarrassing not to be able to answer that question clearly for them. Especially so for an obsessive dork MU fan.

[nola03]

But again, just because you have a problem with Buzz doesn't mean the process was bad.  If the same process resulted in Bennett or Few or Miller, no one would be bitching.  However, if they actually brought in five coaches for thorough interviews, and they still hired Buzz, you people would be bitching about something else.

I'm critical of Cottingham in general and the process specifically, but if the above happened where 5 were interviewed and then they landed on Buzz I wouldn't bitch about anything. Buzz would have been the perfect safety pick for our coaching search.

[THEGYMBAR]

Assistants at top programs, like TC and KO, are going to a better chance of being successful than a mid major head coach. Winning programs are used to recruiting 4 and 5 star recruits. Mid major head coaches are a big risk in my opinion, not different than the Buzz hire. Only difference they actually have coached.

Plain and simple, MU has reached a level were they should have made sure the next hire was an impact coach. How is the done? A list pf A coaches, no true timetable and a thick wallet. Anyone out there that does not believe is the one and only thing that separates most programs is money is kidding themselves.

If you think this is not true think about Alabama football. Everyone says that is the one job you do not want to take. Crazy expectations and crazier alumni. Well, they decided to go after Saban and got him. They got him with a perverse amount of money. MU has been paying TC a perverse amount of money for on court performance. There as a top coach out there that could have been enticed with money. We just did not try.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Hank did not hire Dukiet. Hank's guy was Mike Newell. When Newell took a pass, Hank offered to coach for one year on an interim basis. The Athletic Board had power in those days and decided not to take Hank up on that offer. MU then turned to Dukiet, in many respects because Billy Packer recommended him (Billy was at the height of his "popularity"). I think it is totally wrong to hang Dukiet on Hank. I think the (thankfully) now defunct Athletic board is responsible.

The AD was still involved in the decision...let's not be naive about it...Hank's guy had a foot in the water and then did a 180 and said no....the athletic department was in shambles when Cords took over, absolute shambles.  The previous AD's (Raymonds being the most recent), the board, the university administration, had let the program go into the toilet on so many levels.  Facilities ancient, weight room a joke for most high schools, etc, etc.

Hank has and still does a ton for Marquette University.  An ambassador of the program.  That doesn't take away the reality that MU's slide began with Hank as head coach, with his successor that he hired (Majerus) and with the following replacement...Dukiet.  Classic MU parochialism. 

[THEGYMBAR]

Gato--Both you and Chico's are right on Dukiet hire. Hank was AD and did volunteer to coach for a season. Thankfully he was not taken up on it because that would have been bigger mistake than hiring Dukiet. MU acted with their heart and not their brains in whole Hank situation. He was an assistant coach and never should have been handed the keys to basketball powerhouse.

Hank was AD and he hire Dukiet. The whole thing was a mess because of timing of Rick's quitting and Newell backing out. But to not say Hank hired Dukiet is flat out wrong. So if Buzz sucks do we say Cottingham did not hire him?

[Marquette84]

You're missing the point.

I'm not faulting those mid-major coaches for failing to land high-major talent.  I'm pointing out that they have no experience working at that level.  As I said in my post, I'd take a guy like VCU's grant, because he knows from his experience at Florida what it takes to succeed at the high major level.

I discount completely a guy like Brownell because his experience consists of DePauw, Evansville, Indianapolis, UNC-W and Wright State.  Marquette would easily be the biggest school he's been at since he left high school.

[Murffieus]

Both sources (lower level HC's & high level assistants) have produced good upper Div 1 coaches.

Al mcguire was a HC at a low level school-----and so was Bo Ryan!

Depends on the individual.

[Pakuni]

I'd prefer not to get too much into the Buzz hiring because 84, Pakuni, and others will continue to hammer home their viewpoint that MU did everything right

Yes. That's exactly what we've said.
Just as all you've said is that Marquette did everything wrong, made the worst hire in the history of college basketball and will soon find itself relegated from the Big East and fighting for 8th place in the Summit League.

 

[Pakuni]

As for the failures you cited by mid majors going to a major...look at your paragraph prior to show many that succeeded at the high major level.  Monson also inherited a disaster at Minnesota but still got to the NCAAs.  Mike Deane got to the NCAAs. Tim Welsh got to the NCAAs.  Were they successful....no as they were fired, but they also delivered in some years as well.  They were proven enough commodities to do that. I'd have listed many of the mid majors that did well like Al McGuire, Bruce Pearl, Bo Ryan, Bruce Weber, Ben Howland, Mike Montgomery, Billy Donovan, Bill Self, Jim Calhoun, Lute Olson, Thad Matta, Billy Gillespie, Coach K, John Caliprari....shall I continue?  Many many many successful head coaches at the highest level cut their teeth running mid majors first.  And of course there are many assistant coaches that were promoted up like an Izzo, Williams, Dixon, etc....but most were at the same school many years which is usually a constant with those successful coaches.

Dan Monson made one NCAA appearance in seven seasons, finished in the top half of the Big 10 one time and was 24 games under .500 in the conference. How you defend his tenure in Minnesota is mind-boggling. You'd burn Buzz in effigy if he had the same track record at Marquette.
Same for Welsh. Two NCAA tourneys in nine years. Zero NCAA wins in nine years. If Buzz Williams puts up a similar resume at MU, you'd call it a disaster. And rightly so.
Mike Deane? I'm not going to rehash that debate. Suffice to say, there's a reason he's the former Marquette coach.

Now, on to your examples of success, and a key point that seems to be evading you:

Bruce Pearl -- assistant at Iowa.
Bruce Weber -- assistant at Purdue.
Billy Donovan -- assistant at Kentucky.
Billy Gillispie -- assistant at Illinois.
Bill Self -- assistant at Kansas and Oklahoma State.
Coack K -  assistant at Indiana.
John Calipari -- assistant at Kansas and Pitt.

Most of your examples of mid-major successes are guys who first worked as an assistant at a high-major program and first proved they could recruit and coach at that level. This simply is not true of the mid-major guys you're fawning over, i.e. Lowery, Brownell, Les, etc. To borrow a phrase, it's apples and oranges.

Now list all those assistants with a losing record as a head coach that have succeeded in their second chance...I'm sure there are ton you can come up with there too.    

A more accurate comparison would be to see how some successful coaches fared in their first seasons as a head coach (without dealing with a hurricane-ravaged program, of course). Most guys getting a "second chance," as you say, didn't leave their first job a) on their own volition or b) after one season.

Bill Self: 6-21 in first year as a head coach.
Coach K: 11-14 in first year as a head coach.
John Calipari: 10-18 in first year as a head coach.
Jay Wright: 10-18 in first year as a head coach.

Want some more?

Please, next time read what I actually said in the initial post...thank you....it will help your case greatly. 

You're too funny.

[ChicosBailBonds]

You're missing the point.

I'm not faulting those mid-major coaches for failing to land high-major talent.  I'm pointing out that they have no experience working at that level.  As I said in my post, I'd take a guy like VCU's grant, because he knows from his experience at Florida what it takes to succeed at the high major level.

I discount completely a guy like Brownell because his experience consists of DePauw, Evansville, Indianapolis, UNC-W and Wright State.  Marquette would easily be the biggest school he's been at since he left high school.

I disagree...many of those coaches do work at that level...in fact many of them are the first to recruit those kids and it's later that the big boys come in and swoop up and take that top talent.  Many mid major coaches were assistant coaches at top level schools, and certainly know how to work at that level and what it takes.

That is correct on the Brownwell example, but is it correct with Chris Lowery?  No, he was at Illinois.  Is it correct with a Mark Fox or a Karl Hobbs or Dana Altman or any number of others?  No. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

Dan Monson made one NCAA appearance in seven seasons, finished in the top half of the Big 10 one time and was 24 games under .500 in the conference. How you defend his tenure in Minnesota is mind-boggling. You'd burn Buzz in effigy if he had the same track record at Marquette.
Same for Welsh. Two NCAA tourneys in nine years. Zero NCAA wins in nine years. If Buzz Williams puts up a similar resume at MU, you'd call it a disaster. And rightly so.
Mike Deane? I'm not going to rehash that debate. Suffice to say, there's a reason he's the former Marquette coach.

Now, on to your examples of success, and a key point that seems to be evading you:

Bruce Pearl -- assistant at Iowa.
Bruce Weber -- assistant at Purdue.
Billy Donovan -- assistant at Kentucky.
Billy Gillispie -- assistant at Illinois.
Bill Self -- assistant at Kansas and Oklahoma State.
Coack K -  assistant at Indiana.
John Calipari -- assistant at Kansas and Pitt.

Most of your examples of mid-major successes are guys who first worked as an assistant at a high-major program and first proved they could recruit and coach at that level. This simply is not true of the mid-major guys you're fawning over, i.e. Lowery, Brownell, Les, etc. To borrow a phrase, it's apples and oranges.

A more accurate comparison would be to see how some successful coaches fared in their first seasons as a head coach (without dealing with a hurricane-ravaged program, of course). Most guys getting a "second chance," as you say, didn't leave their first job a) on their own volition or b) after one season.

Bill Self: 6-21 in first year as a head coach.
Coach K: 11-14 in first year as a head coach.
John Calipari: 10-18 in first year as a head coach.
Jay Wright: 10-18 in first year as a head coach.

Want some more?



You're too funny.

Wow....it's clear that you do have a reading problem.

I said..."Were they successful....no as they were fired, but they also delivered in some years as well."

How am I defending them....I said they weren't successful and that's why they were fired but then you accuse me of defending them.  Hardly.  I flat out said they weren't successful.  READ!


As for the successes....I totally agree...they were assistants at high level schools....AND THEN THEY WENT AND BECAME HEAD COACHES AT MID MAJORS FIRST BEFORE GOING STRAIGHT TO THE HEAD COACH SEAT AT A HIGH MAJOR!!!!  DUH!!!! 

That's my entire point...there's a transition to success that works better than most.

1) Assistant coach low to mid major and do it successfully
2) Assistant coach high major and do it successfully
3) Head coach low to mid major and do it successfully
4) Head coach high major

We seemed to skip number 3, for some unknown reason to save a recruiting class and because we had a gun to our head that said if we didn't get a coach in 48 hours the school would turn into a pumpkin at midnight.


Finally, those assistant coaches that took over those specific programs went into horrible situations and turned them around.  THOSE ARE THE BEST COACHES TO HIRE.  They've proven it.  Yes, I want those type of hires.  Absolutely.....you're supporting my case. 

[Murffieus]

Well Al McGuire, Dick Bennett, Bo Ryan, and many others were small school HCs and they did pretty well in high level Div 1.

This argument is silly------as both small HCs and big school assistants both have the potential for success at the major college level----depends on the individual qualifications of the person. Both origins are good preparations for the big time!

[HarveysWallbangers]

Is Pakuni comparing Buzz Williams to Bruce Weber??? Weber was an assistant at Purdue for like 15 years!! Bruce Pearl was a VERY successful D2 head coach and a VERY successful coach at UWM. Donovan was at Kentucky with Pitino (not exactly Billy Gillespie) for YEARS, and also played in the Final Four and the NBA.

How are you even comparing these guys to Buzz Williams? I'm not even convinced that Texas A&M is considered a "high major" basketball program! I mean, is it?

It's my contention that Buzz Williams has been in a "high major" basketball program for exactly 10 months. Even Bob Dukiet was far more qualified than Buzz.

[Pakuni]

Wow....it's clear that you do have a reading problem.
I said..."Were they successful....no as they were fired, but they also delivered in some years as well."

How am I defending them....I said they weren't successful and that's why they were fired but then you accuse me of defending them.  Hardly.  I flat out said they weren't successful.  READ!

"  Monson also inherited a disaster at Minnesota but still got to the NCAAs.  Mike Deane got to the NCAAs. Tim Welsh got to the NCAAs"

Yep. No defending them. At all. 

By the way, using colors and extra large type size, the Internet equivalent of having a hissy fit, won't make you any less wrong, Chico's.
You clearly defended each and every one of them. Noting they were fired - quite an admission on your part - doesn't change that.

But thanks for pointing out my reading problem. I'll have to looked into right away.

That's my entire point...there's a transition to success that works better than most.

Clearly that's not your point. If it were, you wouldn't be pining for the likes of Jim Les and Brad Brownell. Neither followed this so-called "transition to success." Yet you were ready to march upon the Al with torch and pitchfork in hand because MU didn't contact either.
Try as you might - and you're trying mightily - you can't have it both ways. You can't rip on the hiring of Buzz because he didn't follow the "transition to success" then say the administration should have talked to Les, Brownell, Lowery, etc.

We seemed to skip number 3

Yep. We also skipped number 3 in hiring Tom Crean and Kevin O'Neill.
And we all know what disastrous hires those were.

[Pakuni]

Is Pakuni comparing Buzz Williams to Bruce Weber??? Weber was an assistant at Purdue for like 15 years!! Bruce Pearl was a VERY successful D2 head coach and a VERY successful coach at UWM. Donovan was at Kentucky with Pitino (not exactly Billy Gillespie) for YEARS, and also played in the Final Four and the NBA.

Ummm ... no. I was pointing out that most of the mid-major successes Chico was citing were guys who first worked as assistant coaches at high-major programs.  I compared Buzz to none of those guys you mentioned.