Is Danny Manning a serious candidate?

[MU82]

You miss the point, where did I ever say they had to be lateral moves...ever?  I didn’t.  I also never said anything about blueblood....you did.  I didn’t.  Of course many are upgrades, some are lateral, but I never made that criteria...you did.  A lot goes into defining what is a better job...money, conference, dedication to basketball, fan base, geography, etc.

As stated earlier, Gonzaga plays in a midmajor conference so based on your definition here, they must be midnajor.... uhm, no.

Finally, yes some guys were fired, but the hiring schools (which was my point all along) hired an established major coach anyway, INSTEAD of the unproven assistant....again, my premise from the get go.  Experienced major coach vs unproven assistant.

Your premise, as is often the case, is flawed.

Not gonna argue with you for the sake of arguing. You can argue with yourself.

Go Marquette!

[Its DJOver]

I figured, but I don’t buy it.  It’s like saying Wichita State isn’t a major but a mid major. Those programs were consistently ranked higher than 40% of the P5 schools....people get caught up in the conferences they played in, not the program.  Gonzaga plays in a mid major conference, but is no way a mid major.

82's post still used the term "high major", whether you like it or not, the A10, and MVC were not and are still not major conferences.  Bringing up Gonzaga is just begging for our annual "who is a blueblood, and what is a high major" debate.  Please save that for the offseason.

Would you consider Archie going from Dayton to I4 a "high major" switch.  They were consistently ranked higher than many P6 teams, that doesn't make Dayton a high major.

[Cheeks]

Your premise, as is often the case, is flawed.

Not gonna argue with you for the sake of arguing. You can argue with yourself.

Go Marquette!

Please, explain to me why it is....you never give up unless you are buried so don’t start now. 

Look, how can it be flawed when I also said there is no guarantee either way works.  I’m not being absolute on this.  My point is, however, many big programs hire coaches that have done it at the major level rather than taking the risk...that’s what I said and that is true.  Many don’t.  Those that do, some failed and some succeeeded.  There are no guarantees in either approach.

[Dawson Rental]

Fair enough, though here are ones that come to mind for me off top of my head....some of these are dated, most are current


Bennett from Wazzu to UVa
Self from Illinois to KU
Belein from WVU to Michigan
Miller from Xavier to Zona
Williams from KU to UNC
Crean from MU to IU
Howland from Pitt to UCLA
Dixon from Pitt to TCU
Turgeon from Texas A&M to Maryland
Williams from MU to Va Tech
Altman from Creighton to Oregon
Martin from Cal to Missouri
Weber from Illinois to KState
Kruger from Florida to Illinois....later UNLV to Oklahoma
Mack from Xavier to Louisville
Caliprari from Memphis to Kentucky
Holtmann from Butler to Ohio State
Barnes from Clemson to Texas and then to Tennessee
Kennedy from Cincinnati to Ole Miss
Olson from Iowa to Arizona
Pastner from Memphis to Georgia Tech
Martin from K State to South Carolina
Anderson from Mizzou to Arkansas
KO from MU to Tennessee

The three I highlighted I'm pretty sure were guys let go by the first school or in the very least who knew that they were on very soft ground and left.  There are a number of others on your list that I only suspect were in the same boat.

[Cheeks]

82's post still used the term "high major", whether you like it or not, the A10, and MVC were not and are still not major conferences.  Bringing up Gonzaga is just begging for our annual "who is a blueblood, and what is a high major" debate.  Please save that for the offseason.

Would you consider Archie going from Dayton to I4 a "high major" switch.  They were consistently ranked higher than many P6 teams, that doesn't make Dayton a high major.

Yup, he did....but I never did say high major, of course I would love to know what that means to people.  He basically took my statement, changed the goalposts to make a new statement....not sure why he limited it to blue bloods since MU isn’t one and the the topic at hand was about MU’s hiring practices...not that of a blueblood.  Strange. 

You are correct, I did not mention Archie’s hiring.  In my view they are a midmajor at Dayton, but that is probably my bias coming into play.  I believe Xavier, Creighton, Wichita State, Gonzaga, etc were more consistently accomplished then Dayton and maybe that is an error on my part.  Point remains, those bigger programs are hiring other head coaches, not assistant coaches from outside their own program....back to the original point.

[MU82]

Please, explain to me why it is....you never give up unless you are buried so don’t start now. 

Look, how can it be flawed when I also said there is no guarantee either way works.  I’m not being absolute on this.  My point is, however, many big programs hire coaches that have done it at the major level rather than taking the risk...that’s what I said and that is true.  Many don’t.  Those that do, some failed and some succeeeded.  There are no guarantees in either approach.

My point was that it was not very common. Even if every scenario in that list was "allowed," we're still only talking about a couple handfuls of major-to-major moves.

My other point was that MU is 3-for-3 and arguably 4-for-4 (if one counts Buzz) on hiring top-tier assistants for the job. Of course there are no guarantees, but you keep suggesting that hiring a "proven" coach somehow trumps hiring Izzo's top assistant or K's top assistant or Olson's top assistant. You have zero proof that this is true. It's your opinion. Cool. We all have 'em.

I'm mad at myself for continuing to engage a troll who is destined to be banned again.

[Its DJOver]

Yup, he did....but I never did say high major, of course I would love to know what that means to people.  He basically took my statement, changed the goalposts to make a new statement....not sure why he limited it to blue bloods since MU isn’t one and the the topic at hand was about MU’s hiring practices...not that of a blueblood.  Strange. 

You are correct, I did not mention Archie’s hiring.  In my view they are a midmajor at Dayton, but that is probably my bias coming into play.  I believe Xavier, Creighton, Wichita State, Gonzaga, etc were more consistently accomplished then Dayton and maybe that is an error on my part.  Point remains, those bigger programs are hiring other head coaches, not assistant coaches from outside their own program....back to the original point.

82's post asking about high major to high major wasn't in direct response to any post you made.  It was a new topic after he had addressed your last post.  Please try not to make this all about yourself. 

Archie's last four years at Dayton were all 20+ win seasons with NCAA appearances.  Altman's last 4 years at CU included 1 NCAA appearance, 2 NIT, and 1 CIT. 

Point remains that the vast majority of head coaches hired are either assistants at high majors or head coaches at mid majors.  Yes there are a few exceptions, but that is the route that most schools take, precisely because it is hard to poach from another high major.

[Lennys Tap]

Finally, yes some guys were fired, but the hiring schools (which was my point all along) hired an established major coach anyway, INSTEAD of the unproven assistant....again, my premise from the get go.  Experienced major coach vs unproven assistant.

So you would rather hire a guy who has established (at least to his former employer's satisfaction) an inability to do the job rather than someone you're not sure about? I guess sometimes that might work, but guys like Rick Barnes aren't available every year.

Roy Williams (at Kansas), Coach K, Mark Few, Tom Izzo, Cal, Buzz (at MU), Crean (at MU), Bob Knight, Al McGuire, Lefty Driesel, Tark, Calhoun and Dean Smith are guys (off the top of my head) who support 82s argument.

Roy Williams (at UNC), Self, Barnes, Weber, Buzz (at VT) and Crean (at IU and Georgia)  support yours.

I like Mike's list better.

[Cheeks]

Let's do it this way since as usual people are shifting stuff around, defining what "is is" and whether one inhaled or just kept it in their mouth.  So to alleviate the definitions of Mid Major, Blue Blood, Elite, High Major, or whatever other hill people want to die on, let's make it clean.

How many schools from the P5 conferences when hiring their basketball coaches say in the last 25 years, hired existing college D1 head coaches vs hiring an assistant coach NOT FROM THEIR PROGRAM?  Is that clear enough for everyone?  Any wiggle room people want to play with?  To be further clear, this INCLUDES someone that was recently fired but had the requisite head coaching D1 experience and was not an assistant. Clear as a bell?

Now, MU has gone the assistant route quite often with KO, Crean, Wojo.  I think if you look at most of the P5 schools, that is not the case.  It doesn't mean one is right and one is wrong, but there absolutely is more risk with one vs the other.  If people want to include Big East, by all means...we can make it P5 + Big East.

I think you will see that we don't act like the others....so far it has worked....I hope Wojo is here for 25 years and we don't have to worry about it, but if we do have to worry what direction will we go and why do most of the other big programs NOT go down that path? I have my guesses why, and it comes with risk management and satisfying their base....right or wrong, they feel they are "big time" and will go after someone that has proven it to some degree, rather than the risk. 

[Its DJOver]

So only "big time programs" hire coaches that have been fired from other "big time programs", got it.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Let's do it this way since as usual people are shifting stuff around, defining what "is is" and whether one inhaled or just kept it in their mouth.  So to alleviate the definitions of Mid Major, Blue Blood, Elite, High Major, or whatever other hill people want to die on, let's make it clean.

How many schools from the P5 conferences when hiring their basketball coaches say in the last 25 years, hired existing college D1 head coaches vs hiring an assistant coach NOT FROM THEIR PROGRAM?  Is that clear enough for everyone?  Any wiggle room people want to play with?  To be further clear, this INCLUDES someone that was recently fired but had the requisite head coaching D1 experience and was not an assistant. Clear as a bell?

Now, MU has gone the assistant route quite often with KO, Crean, Wojo.  I think if you look at most of the P5 schools, that is not the case.  It doesn't mean one is right and one is wrong, but there absolutely is more risk with one vs the other.  If people want to include Big East, by all means...we can make it P5 + Big East.

I think you will see that we don't act like the others....so far it has worked....I hope Wojo is here for 25 years and we don't have to worry about it, but if we do have to worry what direction will we go and why do most of the other big programs NOT go down that path? I have my guesses why, and it comes with risk management and satisfying their base....right or wrong, they feel they are "big time" and will go after someone that has proven it to some degree, rather than the risk. 

Why is there more risk with hiring an assistant coach from elsewhere?  Over the past 25 years, there have been a ton of head coaches who were eventually fired, many of which were former coaches elsewhere.  The only way you can show that hiring an assistant is riskier is to have the numbers bear that out.  Have they been fired more often?  Do they have a worse winning percentage?

As far as I can tell, only three "high major" programs hired their current coach as an assistant from another program and who didn't have previous head coaching experience, which counts out Jeff Capel. 

Those three are Wojo, Mike Hopkins at Washington and Chris Collins at Northwestern.  All seem to be doing pretty well so far!

[Lennys Tap]

Let's do it this way since as usual people are shifting stuff around, defining what "is is" and whether one inhaled or just kept it in their mouth.  So to alleviate the definitions of Mid Major, Blue Blood, Elite, High Major, or whatever other hill people want to die on, let's make it clean.

How many schools from the P5 conferences when hiring their basketball coaches say in the last 25 years, hired existing college D1 head coaches vs hiring an assistant coach NOT FROM THEIR PROGRAM?  Is that clear enough for everyone?  Any wiggle room people want to play with?  To be further clear, this INCLUDES someone that was recently fired but had the requisite head coaching D1 experience and was not an assistant. Clear as a bell?

Now, MU has gone the assistant route quite often with KO, Crean, Wojo.  I think if you look at most of the P5 schools, that is not the case.  It doesn't mean one is right and one is wrong, but there absolutely is more risk with one vs the other.  If people want to include Big East, by all means...we can make it P5 + Big East.

I think you will see that we don't act like the others....so far it has worked....I hope Wojo is here for 25 years and we don't have to worry about it, but if we do have to worry what direction will we go and why do most of the other big programs NOT go down that path? I have my guesses why, and it comes with risk management and satisfying their base....right or wrong, they feel they are "big time" and will go after someone that has proven it to some degree, rather than the risk.

Talk about shifting the goalposts. I read 2 paragraphs and quit.

[🏀]

I was going to respond, but then I saw the carpet bombing.

Thread's over folks, nothing to see here.

[MU82]

Let's do it this way since as usual people are shifting stuff around, defining what "is is" and whether one inhaled or just kept it in their mouth.  So to alleviate the definitions of Mid Major, Blue Blood, Elite, High Major, or whatever other hill people want to die on, let's make it clean.

How many schools from the P5 conferences when hiring their basketball coaches say in the last 25 years, hired existing college D1 head coaches vs hiring an assistant coach NOT FROM THEIR PROGRAM?  Is that clear enough for everyone?  Any wiggle room people want to play with?  To be further clear, this INCLUDES someone that was recently fired but had the requisite head coaching D1 experience and was not an assistant. Clear as a bell?

Now, MU has gone the assistant route quite often with KO, Crean, Wojo.  I think if you look at most of the P5 schools, that is not the case.  It doesn't mean one is right and one is wrong, but there absolutely is more risk with one vs the other.  If people want to include Big East, by all means...we can make it P5 + Big East.

I think you will see that we don't act like the others....so far it has worked....I hope Wojo is here for 25 years and we don't have to worry about it, but if we do have to worry what direction will we go and why do most of the other big programs NOT go down that path? I have my guesses why, and it comes with risk management and satisfying their base....right or wrong, they feel they are "big time" and will go after someone that has proven it to some degree, rather than the risk.

You keep stating that there is "more risk" in hiring assistants from top-tier programs when you have provided zero proof.

This time, you have amplified that, saying "there absolutely is more risk."

And you're the one who urged others to not state absolutes?

What is "risk"? Where is the evidence? Marquette is 4-for-4 ... is that enough evidence for anyone to state it proves that Marquette has absolutely done it the right way? I mean, it's hard to beat 100%!

chicos, the dead horse you keep beating is just an opinion -- the opinion of one interwebs troll who loves hearing himself argue.

[Cheeks]

So only "big time programs" hire coaches that have been fired from other "big time programs", got it.

Nope, can you show me where anyone said only big time programs hire coaches that have been fired, please focus on the word ONLY.  Maybe then I'll get it. 

[Cheeks]

Talk about shifting the goalposts. I read 2 paragraphs and quit.

Not shifting, establishing....so that people can't go on their wild escapades of definition grabbing. 

Here's the answer to the question and criteria I laid out so people don't get into Blueblood, high major, mid major and all the other nonsense:

In MU's last five hires under that criteria, 60% of the time we went with an assistant coach.  KO, TC, Wojo.  Outside we went Mike Deane and Bob Dukiet.  Buzz was an assistant that was promoted within.  Hank Was an assistant hired within.  Majerus an assistant hired within. 

Dukiet was a disaster, but also a very rare case of a program being put in a bad position because Majerus left in the Summer....just doesn't happen...corner case.  Deane had his moments, two NCAAs and two NITs.  He was promised a practice facility, MU never delivered.  He dealt with two different conferences.  His biggest problem was recruiting and I thought he did him self a disservice in not grabbing a recruiting assistant coach known for that acumen.

Now let's look at P5 schools current coaching hires.  Sorry, I'm not going back 25 years, statistically this should be representative based on current situation.

Pac 12.  Of the 12 coaches currently employed, all of them came from previous head coach positions at D1 schools except Jones...but he was promoted within.  11 of 11  100%

Big 12.  Of the 10 coaches currently employed, all of them came from previous head coach positions at D1 schools except Boynton...but he was promoted within.  9 of 9  100%

SEC.  Of the 14 coaches currently employed, all of them came from previous head coach positions at D1 schools except Johnson (previous NBA head coach).   13 of 14  92.9%

Big 10. Of the 14 coaches currently employed, all of them came from previous head coach positions at D1 schools except Gard & Collins...but Gard was promoted within.  12 of 13  92.3%

ACC.  Of the 15 coaches currently employed, all of them came from previous head coach positions at D1 schools except Boeheim...but he was promoted within.  14 of 14  100%

In summary, the P5 conferences currently have 61 head coaches that were not promoted from within as assistants.  Only two of the 61 were hired without being a D1 coach in their last stop, one of those guys came from the NBA as a head coach.  The other 59 came from D1 as their most recent head coaching stop.

This is the part I wanted to point out before the nonsense started.

96.7% of the time a P5 school hires a head coach with his last stop as a D1 head coach
40% of the time Marquette has done so

[Cheeks]

You keep stating that there is "more risk" in hiring assistants from top-tier programs when you have provided zero proof.

This time, you have amplified that, saying "there absolutely is more risk."

Yes, it is an opinion. Of course it is an opinion.  My "proof" is in the data.  Tell me, why is it that nearly 97% of the time the P5 schools go one direction, and we are vastly different than that only doing it 40% of the time?  In my opinion, the risk level is higher because there is no track record.  The P5 schools don't want to take that risk for fear of backlash from their fans.  That is my opinion.  The data is the data.

[Cheeks]

The three I highlighted I'm pretty sure were guys let go by the first school or in the very least who knew that they were on very soft ground and left.  There are a number of others on your list that I only suspect were in the same boat.

Yet were hired anyway and given millions to take the new job, right?  That's my point...they were hired coming from their last position as a D1 head coach.  And Weber / Kruger did just fine in their new surroundings. We'll see how Pastner does...I'm not a fan.

Lots of ways to hire coaches, I just find the numbers interesting in how MU has done it vs the P5 schools.  Staggeringly different.  So far it has worked for us.

[MU82]

The data is the data.

Agreed. 100% of the time, Marquette hiring top assistant coaches at top-tier programs has been beneficial to the program.

Data!

Glad Marquette followed the data trend and tabbed Wojo, another in a line of excellent hires who had been top assistants.

Glad we didn't take the risk and hire either a head coach retread or a mid-major wannabe.

The data is the data, and the fun thing about data is that a reasonably intelligent debater can almost always find data to support his or her argument.

Heck, even an overly argumentative, multiple-times-banned interwebs troll like you occasionally can pull it off!

[Cheeks]

Agreed. 100% of the time, Marquette hiring top assistant coaches at top-tier programs has been beneficial to the program.

Data!

Glad Marquette followed the data trend and tabbed Wojo, another in a line of excellent hires who had been top assistants.

Glad we didn't take the risk and hire either a head coach retread or a mid-major wannabe.

The data is the data, and the fun thing about data is that a reasonably intelligent debater can almost always find data to support his or her argument.

Heck, even an overly argumentative, multiple-times-banned interwebs troll like you occasionally can pull it off!

Erin Andrews would be proud.  I don't want to put words in your mouth as you do with me, so let me ask....are other head coaches retreads?  Mid Majors are wannabes?  I don't think you would say this, but it sounds like you are saying those guys shouldn't be considered....which makes me wonder why we bothered to go after Tony Bennett (a head coach retread) or Cuonzo Martin or any other previous head coach.  As for the mid major wannabes, well some work out and some don't. Same for assistants, same for head coaches.  I just find it interesting how much we buck the data trend. 

[oldwarrior81]

Mike Hopkins at Washington is counted as a head coach at Syracuse?

Stretching a bit with that one.  Wasn't he coach for like 7 games when Boeheim was out three years ago.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

I just find it interesting how much we buck the data trend.

Is this referencing the P5 data you supplied?  Since Marquette is not a P5 school, I don't think any data trend is being bucked.

Apples and oranges.

[tower912]

Izzo was never a head coach anywhere but MSU.    A trivial adjustment, but a mistake nonetheless.   

[Dr. Blackheart]

Cheeks,

You are Cords’ buddy...why did he like to buck the data?  He hired three out of four of those assistants into HC jobs including Wojo.

[Cheeks]

Is this referencing the P5 data you supplied?  Since Marquette is not a P5 school, I don't think any data trend is being bucked.

Apples and oranges.

Correct, but as we all know and I mentioned earlier that in college hoops it is the P5 + the Big East as we have adopted the same measures as P5 schools. So it's apples to apples.  I offered to do the same exercise with Big East schools

But you bring up a good point.  For the Big East it is different in how currently we have hired, maybe we can't attract the "retreads and wannabes" and forced to go that route.  Mullin was an obvious alum hire. Ewing the same.  Leitao's last gig was an assistant from another program, but of course DePaul hired someone who was their former head coach...about as corner a corner case you can have...I can only think of one other time that has happened in the last 25 years.  Then you have Wojo.  The rest came from other D1 programs or were promoted within.

Maybe the Big East