MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: ChicosBailBonds on April 30, 2008, 11:25:08 PM
-
Buzz in at $1.1 million
Interesting. I'd love to know when MU contacted Tony if we even got to the point of throwing a figure out there. Considering we were paying Crean $1.6 million I would have loved to be a fly on the wall to hear what we would have paid Bennett.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/cougars/2004384558_bennett01.html?syndication=rss
-
Buyout of only $500k. We're paying our unproven head coach nearly as much and he hasn't taken any team to the Tournament. Maybe Bennett isn't a money grabbing coach like we've had here in the past. In fact, he probably has something which we also haven't had in a while, i.e., LOYALTY.
-
Who knows why he turned down our offer. For all we know, he really wants the UW job. How awkward and hated would he be if he coached MU for 5 years and then went to UW?
-
Buzz in at $1.1 million
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/cougars/2004384558_bennett01.html?syndication=rss
Umm .. "Buzz in at $1.1M"? Where'd that come from?
-
Are we sure he was even offered the MU job at a reasonable salary increase?
As more time goes on, the more I become convinced that we hardly looked...that we decided that in order to keep our recruiting class intact (too late!) that we should hire Williams. We know for certain only one guy was interviewed.
To me, the "process" -- if you can call it that -- sounds disgraceful.
-
Are we sure he was even offered the MU job at a reasonable salary increase?
As more time goes on, the more I become convinced that we hardly looked...that we decided that in order to keep our recruiting class intact (too late!) that we should hire Williams. We know for certain only one guy was interviewed.
To me, the "process" -- if you can call it that -- sounds disgraceful.
Don't forget that people believe Buzz was hired because if he hadn't been hired we would have also lost Dominic James, Jerel McNeal, and Trevor Mbakwe. That seems grounded more in desperation then fact.
-
sure do love that ignore button. thanks mods.
-
Our daughter attends Wazzou - we were just in Pullman last weekend. It's a different place and you either love it or hate it. Despite whatever drawbacks the location might have for some, I admire Bennett for his loyalty. In fact, I find that dedication to his employer and his team members refreshing. I know one of the Wazzou Asst football coaches and he said that Bennett was given "serious consideration" by MU but that Bennett never considered leaving WSU. He is proud to be a Cougar and, evidently, he and his family enjoy life in the Palouse. According to this source, it is unlikely Bennett will leave Pullman anytime soon. He was contacted this year by Pac 10, Big 10, and Big East schools but he firmly dismissed each of these inquiries.
-
Who knows why he turned down our offer. For all we know, he really wants the UW job. How awkward and hated would he be if he coached MU for 5 years and then went to UW?
And maybe he knows in his heart of hearts that the UW@probation job is his end all job. And he knows if he takes the MU job he "couldn't" take the UW job or, as you state, knows he would be hated around these here parts.
-
I'm not sure I follow the line of logic here:
Bennett re-signs with Wash... and people take that as proof that MU messed up?
I'm not sure I understand.
Maybe Tony resigned because he is happy there (for now).
He did publicly turn down the IU job... and let's face it, IU is really a premier job, so I'm not sure how/why people are convinced that MU had a shot at him.
I'm not sure the Wisconsin ties are enough... plus if UW is his dream job, taking the IU or the MU job would somewhat inhibit his ability to eventually take the UW job.
-
not all people took it as a sign that MU messed up. only those with an agenda saw it that way.
-
Umm .. "Buzz in at $1.1M"? Where'd that come from?
$1.16 million per year
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=8655.0
-
not all people took it as a sign that MU messed up. only those with an agenda saw it that way.
The people whose agenda is that Marquette do their due diligence, explore all options and hire the best coach possible?
Those people?
-
The people whose agenda is that Marquette do their due diligence, explore all options and hire the best coach possible?
Those people?
Unlike you, who has no idea what went on, but choose to believe the worst. Let's just say that you are waaaaaay off base on this one.
-
For whatever reasons one chooses to believe, MU f'ed up the entire hiring process and that cannot be logically argued.
-
Well, then, you must know something no one else does. Care to share? And I mean specifics, not just the usual suppositions and generalities.
-
Well, then, you must know something no one else does. Care to share? And I mean specifics, not just the usual suppositions and generalities.
I know that it only took 8 days for MU to go from "Holy crap we need to find a coach" to "Not only did we interview everyone we needed to but we decided on someone and had time to negotiate a contract.
-
a lot of it is done using back channels. props to MU for making a decision and acting on it promptly.
-
a lot of it is done using back channels. props to MU for making a decision and acting on it promptly.
uh-huh and who is acting like they no something no one else does now?
-
Buzz in at $1.1 million
Interesting. I'd love to know when MU contacted Tony if we even got to the point of throwing a figure out there. Considering we were paying Crean $1.6 million I would have loved to be a fly on the wall to hear what we would have paid Bennett.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/cougars/2004384558_bennett01.html?syndication=rss
1 million in Pullman goes a long way. He is probably the highest paid guy in the town.
-
I'm not breaking any news by saying that back channels are frequently used in these situations. That has been corroborated many, many times on this board.
The time frame is not the issue. The only issue is did MU get the person they believed to be the best candidate according to their specifications.
-
a lot of it is done using back channels. props to MU for making a decision and acting on it promptly.
Jim Jones would be proud of you.
-
Well, then, you must know something no one else does. Care to share? And I mean specifics, not just the usual suppositions and generalities.
I've explained this before and have it from good authority so take it to the bank. The now departed former coach, rest his soul, got the ear of his major donors and convinced him that Buzz was the man to lead the Warriors to the promised land. Donor(s) then laid the heat on the powers that be to hire Williams. End of story. You can be in denial or accept the facts.
-
and Al Gore of you.
-
4ever - did this all happen on a grassy knoll?
-
The only issue is did MU get the person they believed to be the best candidate according to their specifications.
Well, if you ask them, they do believe they got the best candidate according to "their" specs. The real question is, did they get the best candidate they could have....we'll never know.
I do have one disagreement with Rawdog....that 8 days should be more like 4 days....they decided on Buzz during the weekend even if the official announcement didn't come out until a few days later. 4 days....I don't know if Blockbuster can process a membership application in four days but it is what it is.
-
For whatever reasons one chooses to believe, MU f'ed up the entire hiring process and that cannot be logically argued.
Hey, we've just got different opinions... and there is no need to argue that.
I'm just curious how the TB situation really supports or proves anything about MU as some people are trying to imply.
It's not the smoking gun some people are making it out to be.
That's all. Just trying to be logical... and I'm not seeing the logic in this one.
I didn't mean to fire everybody up.
-
4ever - did this all happen on a grassy knoll?
Let's face it 4ever, he has us, obviously MU searched far and wide carefully evaluating every possible candidate, and interviewed many of them, I heard they even conducted web interviews via web cam so that none of the multitudes of coaches had to come to Milwaukee. This was all done through back channels, which can't be made fun of for sounding like a conspiracy because he is being positive. So he's able to reference behind the scenes moves and obviously anything positive has nothing to do with grassy knolls thus we are crazy and he is correct.
-
I do have one disagreement with Rawdog....that 8 days should be more like 4 days....they decided on Buzz during the weekend even if the official announcement didn't come out until a few days later. 4 days....I don't know if Blockbuster can process a membership application in four days but it is what it is.
You are completely correct. You know when I typed that post i had put 6 days at first, and then I thought, "No... it couldn't have possibly been that fast." Thanks for rememinding me how much of a snap decision this was for the AD who had never interviewed any basketball coach before. I'm sure he is a hell of a negotiator when he buys a car as well.
i recently canceled an electronic bill payment that was never cashed, it took 5 days before the money was back in my account.
-
You are completely correct. You know when I typed that post i had put 6 days at first, and then I thought, "No... it couldn't have possibly been that fast." Thanks for rememinding me how much of a snap decision this was for the AD who had never interviewed any basketball coach before. I'm sure he is a hell of a negotiator when he buys a car as well.
i recently canceled an electronic bill payment that was never cashed, it took 5 days before the money was back in my account.
This also fits the timeline with someone posting that Mrs. Williams was seen purchasing in excess of $1000.00 of MU gear in the Spirit Shop on April 5.
-
I know that this thread has a distinctly financial bent, but I for one am thrilled we didn't hire Bennett. We would have had a coach who is loyal to a rival and would have bolted the moment that Dracula, I mean Bo Ryan, left. Also, Bennett-ball is among the most unpleasant things in sports to behold. Do you honestly want to pay for season tickets to watch 24 48-46 wins?
-
I know that this thread has a distinctly financial bent, but I for one am thrilled we didn't hire Bennett. We would have had a coach who is loyal to a rival and would have bolted the moment that Dracula, I mean Bo Ryan, left. Also, Bennett-ball is among the most unpleasant things in sports to behold. Do you honestly want to pay for season tickets to watch 24 48-46 wins?
I honestly don't know why you think it's a slam dunk that he's going to UW-Madison when Count Chocula retires/dies from complaining on every call to the refs. There is a history there that works both ways.
I do understand your point. I'd still love to know how much MU offered or if it ever got to a point of terms being discussed (one would assume it did or his agent should be fired). Bennett isn't making that much which is why it's a valid question in my mind.
-
It would definitely be an interesting fact to know, but maybe when considering the possiblility that Bennett would bolt for Madison caused the SC and co. to not consider him as seriously as we all assume/hope they did.
-
To the people hating on the 'process' - what is your honest opinion on these thoughts:
Our overall goal as MU fans is to win a national championship, that being said, I don't think we can do that by bringing in one of the 'big names' that everyone was throwing around.
If we go out and bring in a Bennet, Lowry, Miller, etc - we are doing the same thing that IU did to us, but unfortunately for us, we are not a destination school like IU, and those guys don't have that strong of ties to MU (namely they aren't alums).
If one of the above coaches starts being successful enough where we become championship contenders or even win the Big East, then the big dogs will come calling - and there is a VERY good chance we lose them before achieving the ultimate success we desire. Since we basically bought them to come here with money and prestige, what do you think will happen when schools with more prestige and just as much (if not more) money come calling?
If I were selecting our next head coach (from my cubicle in Chicago, ha), I take the coach with the most upside to win a title AND is the most likely to stick around for that to happen. I think there is a very good chance that Buzz convinced people that he had that best mix of those two, whereas all of our other top choices fell flat in the sticking around department.
I am hoping Buzz is a loyal guy, if that is the case, and he lives up to his 'alleged' recruiting process, I am very happy with the hire. If not, well, crap, we will be doing this process soon enough again. I like taking the risk if the POTENTIAL reward is higher. Bennet, IMO, "doomed" us as a program to stay flat - Crean level success if you will - or a deep tourney run and he bolts.
-
Tm, before I answer the rest of your question, don't you think if any coach (whether previously successful or a relative unknown) does well the big dogs will come after him?
-
I have heard from people close to the program that what 4ever says is very true. The only thing is he chooses to at times say "donors" plural. I don't know if it's plural. I have also heard that most of the group that brought you Gold, was in the dark on this hire.
Of course me sticking up for 4ever is probably seen as Bill O'Rielly calling GW a good president.
-
If one of the above coaches starts being successful enough where we become championship contenders or even win the Big East, then the big dogs will come calling - and there is a VERY good chance we lose them before achieving the ultimate success we desire. Since we basically bought them to come here with money and prestige, what do you think will happen when schools with more prestige and just as much (if not more) money come calling?
There are only 7-9 programs that are significantly more prestigious than mu. Most don't have job openings very often (ie. duke and UNC) and if one does and the coach we hired is doing well enough for them to go after him that proably means he has been successful and we will have better national rec than we have now and can get another proven coach.
If I were selecting our next head coach (from my cubicle in Chicago, ha), I take the coach with the most upside to win a title AND is the most likely to stick around for that to happen. I think there is a very good chance that Buzz convinced people that he had that best mix of those two, whereas all of our other top choices fell flat in the sticking around department.
And you would know buzz has more potential to do these things because you would interview candidates and weigh pros and cons right? ... Yeah, that's what i thought.
I am hoping Buzz is a loyal guy, if that is the case, and he lives up to his 'alleged' recruiting process, I am very happy with the hire.
Obviously, we are all hoping that as well, and I'm not saying he's a bad choice just that they didn't exercise due diligence.
If not, well, crap, we will be doing this process soon enough again. I like taking the risk if the POTENTIAL reward is higher.
Wrong, wrong. If he does badly then we will have to go after 'diamonds in the rough' candidates rather than the coaches with proven track records we had a better shot at this year. This year we decided to search for a possible diamond in the rough when we didn't need to look in the rough and could have just gone to Jared like a normal school in our position.
Bennet, IMO, "doomed" us as a program to stay flat - Crean level success if you will - or a deep tourney run and he bolts.
You have no basis for that comment on Bennet. And let us not act like buzz has been loyalty incarnate through his career. (leaving his last gig after one year)
Once again love buzz as a person, I'll be optimistic as soon as he can show me he can coach a lick and lands a stud pg to take over in 2009
-
so, if I am reading you correctly, 4ever's claim is that the same "big donor" that put the heat on TC after the Stanford loss and basically, ran him out of town, is now the same "big donor" that TC called and convinced him to convince MU to hire Buzz?
-
I am hoping Buzz is a loyal guy
I hope so too. But...
1) Until last year, he had no reason to be in Wisconsin
2) He left UNO pretty quickly.
#1 tells me that if he's successful he's likely to move, #2 tells me he's willing to move if he thinks he has better opportunities elsewhere. Now the funny thing, if he were in TCs shoes, I'd speculate that he wouldn't have taken the IU job. He has already been in a job where he knew things were gonna' be tough - and left it when he figured out that it was going to be much tougher than advertised (UNO).
-
To the people hating on the 'process' - what is your honest opinion on these thoughts:
Our overall goal as MU fans is to win a national championship, that being said, I don't think we can do that by bringing in one of the 'big names' that everyone was throwing around.
If we go out and bring in a Bennet, Lowry, Miller, etc - we are doing the same thing that IU did to us, but unfortunately for us, we are not a destination school like IU, and those guys don't have that strong of ties to MU (namely they aren't alums).
If one of the above coaches starts being successful enough where we become championship contenders or even win the Big East, then the big dogs will come calling - and there is a VERY good chance we lose them before achieving the ultimate success we desire. Since we basically bought them to come here with money and prestige, what do you think will happen when schools with more prestige and just as much (if not more) money come calling?
If I were selecting our next head coach (from my cubicle in Chicago, ha), I take the coach with the most upside to win a title AND is the most likely to stick around for that to happen. I think there is a very good chance that Buzz convinced people that he had that best mix of those two, whereas all of our other top choices fell flat in the sticking around department.
I am hoping Buzz is a loyal guy, if that is the case, and he lives up to his 'alleged' recruiting process, I am very happy with the hire. If not, well, crap, we will be doing this process soon enough again. I like taking the risk if the POTENTIAL reward is higher. Bennet, IMO, "doomed" us as a program to stay flat - Crean level success if you will - or a deep tourney run and he bolts.
So to address your questions, I think a hire is largely dictated by the position you are in. I'm all for assistants when it makes sense. As I've said, I'm fine with Buzz if other options were exhausted...I just don't think they were.
MU has a top 20 team coming back this year, was paying $1.6 million to the previous guy, etc, etc....in my mind you go after an established coach. No different then what Illinois did when they hired Weber (yes, someone is going to say he had a terrible year last year...he did, but his recruiting for the next two years is very good and if he had still landed Gordon, they would have made the NCAAs again this past year).
If your team is down and out, then that's a different kind of hire. If you're team is on the cusp of taking the next step, then that's a totally different kind of hire.
But I'm not going back on what my original beliefs are....I have no ill will toward Buzz. Hope like hell he's the guy, want him to succeed, think he can succeed.....I just would have liked a run on another handful of candidates that in my mind were more polished, had a track record (winning) as a head coach, etc. Whether that was a Lowery, Les, Ford, Brownwell, etc....those would have all been people of interest before I would have gone the Buzz route.
I don't think you should handcuff yourself in limiting who you are going to go after because they might be taken by a "big dog" in a few years, that's not the way to run a business let alone a successful athletic department. HIRE THE BEST you can and deal with those issues when they come about. Don't underhire due to fear.
-
so, if I am reading you correctly, 4ever's claim is that the same "big donor" that put the heat on TC after the Stanford loss and basically, ran him out of town, is now the same "big donor" that TC called and convinced him to convince MU to hire Buzz?
That's what I'm saying, Bro, except Strong never "ran" the pinhead out of town. He has wanted out of here in the worst way from the moment the final buzzer went off in New Orleans after having his butt handed to him by the Jayhawks. Its just some folks believed his b.s.
-
I just would have liked a run on another handful of candidates that in my mind were more polished, had a track record (winning) as a head coach, etc. Whether that was a Lowery, Les, Ford, Brownwell, etc....those would have all been people of interest before I would have gone the Buzz route.
But what if from the very first momets of the search you determined your criteria was "no mid-major coaches".
That would not be an unreasonble constraint, given that twice MU has failed by hiring such coaches.
In that case, interviewing Les, Lowery, Ford, Brownell would be a waste of time, becuase you decided first that none of them would be considerd.
I know you've made the point that they should have been interviwed--but what would that have accmplished? Obviously, mid-major coahes can interview quite well (Bob Duket did). Obviously they can come in with an impressive list of achievements at lower levels (Dukeit's teams were often #1 or 2 in both offense and defense). Obviously they can put up impressive credentials in recriting (Jersey City in the 1980's was not a garden spot). On paper, Bob Duket was as impressive as Brad Brownell is today. What crystal ball do you believe exists that can tell you whether or not Brownell is the next Dukiet?
So the question is whether any amount of intereviewing and research would convince you that Brownell was not just another Bob Dukiet, who would be in over his head? My guess is no, which is why a sharp line was drawn on interviewing any of them. MU has had two successful coaches who were assistants at big-time programs, and two failed coaches who were successful head coaches at mid-majors. And you seem surprised that Brownell, Lowrey, Les, etc. didn't get consideration!
Once "we're not going to hire a mid-major coach" becomes a criteria, the ranks become pretty slim--one of the handful of successful major program coaches who we might perceive to be underemployed (Bennett, Miller, Few, Calipari). Or a major assistant.
What I've read suggests that the job was floated in front of Bennett and Miller with no interest, and Few took himself out of contention early on. That mens looking next on your list, which was a major assistant. Ours. Who despite all the talk about how we didn't look that long has been in the department for nine months, and has interfaced with fans, boosters, players, recruits, AD office staff, etc.
-
That's what I'm saying, Bro, except Strong never "ran" the pinhead out of town. He has wanted out of here in the worst way from the moment the final buzzer went off in New Orleans after having his butt handed to him by the Jayhawks. Its just some folks believed his b.s.
What bs? I don't think I ever heard him say that he would be the coach at MU until the day he retired.
Seriously, what do you expect? Do you really expect coaches to have a public list of jobs they think are better than the one they currently have. I can just see what you want: "I'm the coach at MU for now, but I'm not so much in love with the place that I wouldn't leave for Duke, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana, or other similar program." Yeah, THAT would be good for recruiting.
Obviously he didn't want out badly enough to take $2 mil/year from Arkansas, which WAS offered. Hmm. If Crean were so completely disgusted with MU and couldn't wait to get out, wouldn't he have taken that offer?
In fact, if Crean really wanted out of MU in the worst way, there were no shortage of lateral or slightly downgraded jobs he could have taken at any time. He could have gone after Tennessee. Texas A&M. Nebraska. West Virginai. Kansas State. Xavier. Michigan. Iowa. Missouri. Baylor. Georgia Tech. Miami. Rutgers. Stanford. Arizona State. St. Johns. Arkansas. Vanderbilt. Washington. St. Louis. etc. etc. etc.
For a guy who wanted out in the worst way, there were no shortage of places that he didn't chase.
I don't think wanting to go to Kentucky, Kansas, UCLA or even Indiana is a sign of "wanting out of here in the worst way" as much as wanting to go after one of the elite jobs in all of college basketball.
-
What bs? I don't think I ever heard him say that he would be the coach at MU until the day he retired.
Seriously, what do you expect? Do you really expect coaches to have a public list of jobs they think are better than the one they currently have. I can just see what you want: "I'm the coach at MU for now, but I'm not so much in love with the place that I wouldn't leave for Duke, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana, or other similar program." Yeah, THAT would be good for recruiting.
Obviously he didn't want out badly enough to take $2 mil/year from Arkansas, which WAS offered. Hmm. If Crean were so completely disgusted with MU and couldn't wait to get out, wouldn't he have taken that offer?
In fact, if Crean really wanted out of MU in the worst way, there were no shortage of lateral or slightly downgraded jobs he could have taken at any time. He could have gone after Tennessee. Texas A&M. Nebraska. West Virginai. Kansas State. Xavier. Michigan. Iowa. Missouri. Baylor. Georgia Tech. Miami. Rutgers. Stanford. Arizona State. St. Johns. Arkansas. Vanderbilt. Washington. St. Louis. etc. etc. etc.
For a guy who wanted out in the worst way, there were no shortage of places that he didn't chase.
I don't think wanting to go to Kentucky, Kansas, UCLA or even Indiana is a sign of "wanting out of here in the worst way" as much as wanting to go after one of the elite jobs in all of college basketball.
I'd love to hear a response to this 4ever.
-
That's what I'm saying, Bro, except Strong never "ran" the pinhead out of town. He has wanted out of here in the worst way from the moment the final buzzer went off in New Orleans after having his butt handed to him by the Jayhawks. Its just some folks believed his b.s.
Some folks also believed in 26 of 27 players graduating, no NCAA violations, 3 NCAAs in the last 3 years....A-hole or not....those are good things and things that hadn't been done here in decades. It has nothing to do with believing his B.S., it's about RESULTS. The RESULTS were very good and let's hope like hell they are repeated, but I have my concerns about that.
-
But what if from the very first momets of the search you determined your criteria was "no mid-major coaches".
That would not be an unreasonble constraint, given that twice MU has failed by hiring such coaches.
In that case, interviewing Les, Lowery, Ford, Brownell would be a waste of time, becuase you decided first that none of them would be considerd.
I know you've made the point that they should have been interviwed--but what would that have accmplished? Obviously, mid-major coahes can interview quite well (Bob Duket did). Obviously they can come in with an impressive list of achievements at lower levels (Dukeit's teams were often #1 or 2 in both offense and defense). Obviously they can put up impressive credentials in recriting (Jersey City in the 1980's was not a garden spot). On paper, Bob Duket was as impressive as Brad Brownell is today. What crystal ball do you believe exists that can tell you whether or not Brownell is the next Dukiet?
So the question is whether any amount of intereviewing and research would convince you that Brownell was not just another Bob Dukiet, who would be in over his head? My guess is no, which is why a sharp line was drawn on interviewing any of them. MU has had two successful coaches who were assistants at big-time programs, and two failed coaches who were successful head coaches at mid-majors. And you seem surprised that Brownell, Lowrey, Les, etc. didn't get consideration!
Once "we're not going to hire a mid-major coach" becomes a criteria, the ranks become pretty slim--one of the handful of successful major program coaches who we might perceive to be underemployed (Bennett, Miller, Few, Calipari). Or a major assistant.
What I've read suggests that the job was floated in front of Bennett and Miller with no interest, and Few took himself out of contention early on. That mens looking next on your list, which was a major assistant. Ours. Who despite all the talk about how we didn't look that long has been in the department for nine months, and has interfaced with fans, boosters, players, recruits, AD office staff, etc.
So Marquette84, you're saying Marquette eliminated a HUGE pool of candidates because of a bad hire made more than 20 years ago?
That wouldn't make a whole lot of sense, particularly when you compare the quality of mid-major conferences today and when we hired Dukiet.
-
But what if from the very first momets of the search you determined your criteria was "no mid-major coaches".
That would not be an unreasonble constraint, given that twice MU has failed by hiring such coaches.
In that case, interviewing Les, Lowery, Ford, Brownell would be a waste of time, becuase you decided first that none of them would be considerd.
I know you've made the point that they should have been interviwed--but what would that have accmplished? Obviously, mid-major coahes can interview quite well (Bob Duket did). Obviously they can come in with an impressive list of achievements at lower levels (Dukeit's teams were often #1 or 2 in both offense and defense). Obviously they can put up impressive credentials in recriting (Jersey City in the 1980's was not a garden spot). On paper, Bob Duket was as impressive as Brad Brownell is today. What crystal ball do you believe exists that can tell you whether or not Brownell is the next Dukiet?
So the question is whether any amount of intereviewing and research would convince you that Brownell was not just another Bob Dukiet, who would be in over his head? My guess is no, which is why a sharp line was drawn on interviewing any of them. MU has had two successful coaches who were assistants at big-time programs, and two failed coaches who were successful head coaches at mid-majors. And you seem surprised that Brownell, Lowrey, Les, etc. didn't get consideration!
Once "we're not going to hire a mid-major coach" becomes a criteria, the ranks become pretty slim--one of the handful of successful major program coaches who we might perceive to be underemployed (Bennett, Miller, Few, Calipari). Or a major assistant.
What I've read suggests that the job was floated in front of Bennett and Miller with no interest, and Few took himself out of contention early on. That mens looking next on your list, which was a major assistant. Ours. Who despite all the talk about how we didn't look that long has been in the department for nine months, and has interfaced with fans, boosters, players, recruits, AD office staff, etc.
It would be sad, in my opinion, if they said no mid-major coaches. Of course we know they didn't say that because they reached to the Davidson head coach and he said no, so it's a moot point. They did consider some mid-majors, doesn't look like very many.
Besides, wasn't Buzz a mid-major head coach just last year?
-
What bs? I don't think I ever heard him say that he would be the coach at MU until the day he retired.
Seriously, what do you expect? Do you really expect coaches to have a public list of jobs they think are better than the one they currently have. I can just see what you want: "I'm the coach at MU for now, but I'm not so much in love with the place that I wouldn't leave for Duke, UNC, Kansas, Kentucky, Indiana, or other similar program." Yeah, THAT would be good for recruiting.
Obviously he didn't want out badly enough to take $2 mil/year from Arkansas, which WAS offered. Hmm. If Crean were so completely disgusted with MU and couldn't wait to get out, wouldn't he have taken that offer?
In fact, if Crean really wanted out of MU in the worst way, there were no shortage of lateral or slightly downgraded jobs he could have taken at any time. He could have gone after Tennessee. Texas A&M. Nebraska. West Virginai. Kansas State. Xavier. Michigan. Iowa. Missouri. Baylor. Georgia Tech. Miami. Rutgers. Stanford. Arizona State. St. Johns. Arkansas. Vanderbilt. Washington. St. Louis. etc. etc. etc.
For a guy who wanted out in the worst way, there were no shortage of places that he didn't chase.
I don't think wanting to go to Kentucky, Kansas, UCLA or even Indiana is a sign of "wanting out of here in the worst way" as much as wanting to go after one of the elite jobs in all of college basketball.
You forgot to mention Illinois, Virginia and Ohio State -- all schools who rejected Crean's overtures.
-
I'd love to hear a response to this 4ever.
The bull.... I'm talking about was his everyday rhetoric which was about as believable as listening to a used car salesman.
As for other jobs, he chased and coveted those that would pay more than the small fortune MU ponied up.
-
Crean was little more than an unsophisticated used car salesman. He chased after every "major" position that came along. Like they say, a blind squirrel will eventually find a nut just like a bull slinger will finally convince someone to drink the snake oil.
-
The bull.... I'm talking about was his everyday rhetoric which was about as believable as listening to a used car salesman.
Some specific examples might help.
If it involves the fact that Crean never annouced in advance he wanted to leave MU I have to wonder how that is a problem. Again, I don't think telling the world that you're simply settling until Duke or Indiana comes calling is good for recruting.
Frankly, I have to question if his everyday rhetoric is truly any different than any other coach. Again, your expectation seems to be that coaches should be completely upfront that they're not committed to their current job, since virtually anyone is going to be interested in Duke, UNC, Kansas, etc.
As for other jobs, he chased and coveted those that would pay more than the small fortune MU ponied up.
Sorry but this is not consistent with the offer from Arkansas he turned down.
I don't see a problem with coveting jobs at Kentucky or Indiana or Kansas--they're among the top jobs in the country. And I don't see a problem with leveraging a position at Virgina or Illinos to get fair wage at MU.
-
Who knew that Tony Bennett's contract would create such a stir about coach Crean.
:-\
I know it's been said before, but I wonder what the message boards would have looked like back in 77. If Crean can create this amount of debate, imagine what Al would've done. I think we all love his results, but let's be honest and say that his tactics would have been highly debatable subject(s).
-
Who knew that Tony Bennett's contract would create such a stir about coach Crean.
:-\
I know it's been said before, but I wonder what the message boards would have looked like back in 77. If Crean can create this amount of debate, imagine what Al would've done. I think we all love his results, but let's be honest and say that his tactics would have been highly debatable subject(s).
I can imagine the '77 year, losing 4 straight games, etc....some people would be screaming bloody murder. Him trying to leave to go to the Bucks the year prior, punching Toone in the locker room in the first round, barely making the NCAAs to begin with (last team in) etc. Yeah, it would have been interesting to say the lease.
-
Crean was little more than an unsophisticated used car salesman. He chased after every "major" position that came along. Like they say, a blind squirrel will eventually find a nut just like a bull slinger will finally convince someone to drink the snake oil.
Are you on/off some sort of meds? Who the hell says that and how is that relavant? What "major" positions are you talking about? He got offers and didn't take them. The fact that he listend to them is normal. He listened till he got the one he felt was right and took it.
-
Crean is an ass.
-
Buyout of only $500k. We're paying our unproven head coach nearly as much and he hasn't taken any team to the Tournament. Maybe Bennett isn't a money grabbing coach like we've had here in the past. In fact, he probably has something which we also haven't had in a while, i.e., LOYALTY.
so if he takes his team to the tournament this upcoming season it will be worth it?
see the problem is, if MU finishes in the top 3 in conf and makes the sweet 16 or better everyone here who hates the Buzz move will love it because those same people hated crean so they will say---
1- see crean is a joke he couldnt win with the same guys
2- easy with buzz, they arent his players lets see what he can do with his
i can see it already. IMO, a successful year this upcoming season and this was a good hire, whether or not Buzz succeeds in the next 3-4 years. If the team has a good year and then buzz ends up not being able to recruit and coach fire him in 3-4 years and go get someone else
you are not getting a proven guy, you are getting a guy who has to prove himself and has all the pressure in the world- and he knows that. if he cant do it, move on, but atleast you are giving him a great shot to succeed.
we will all know if he can coach good talent next year, we will also know if he can recruit good talent next year. If he does both, you may have your guy. If he does neither, youll know quickly.
The only thing i dislike about the hire is that this upcoming season could be very special, and if he cant coach it could destroy that opportunity. However, the players like the guy, give him a shot to come in and do some damage, good damage, from the start and get this thing rolling.
-
Dimitri, the problem with that is if you doesn't succeed years 3-4, then MU has gone backwards at a time they shouldn't be going backwards. That's where the risk comes in.
Look, Barry Switzer could get us into the NCAAs next year so anything less than a NCAA bid is a bad year. With all these seniors, all conference players, no excuse (other than key injuries) to make the NCAAs (what we do in them is another story...that's a crap shoot).
If the sole purpose was to hire someone to have success next year, then this would a horrible hire because anyone worth their salt as a coach could pull that off.
I agree he's under a lot of pressure, but so would anyone else be.
This will be judged a good or bad hire by year 3....I think other coaches could have been judged a good hire with a lot more certainty on day 1 or year 1 at the worst. That's the risk, that's the course MU chose to make....could pay huge dividends if he can recruit well to MU as a head coach (not as an assistant, big difference) and get them to play for him.
-
I have heard from people close to the program that what 4ever says is very true. The only thing is he chooses to at times say "donors" plural. I don't know if it's plural. I have also heard that most of the group that brought you Gold, was in the dark on this hire.
Of course me sticking up for 4ever is probably seen as Bill O'Rielly calling GW a good president.
I have faith that this man is writing the truth. And, by transitive property, 4everwarriors is speaking the truth. The reasoning is plausible.
Warthog Driver said Crean was an unsophisticated used car salesman. I don't think that's true at all. There is a section of MU fans who feel absolute hatred toward Crean and that only comes from people that feel betrayed. Betrayal only comes from having felt connected. Crean created that.
If believing the donor story, then Crean is a much more sophisticated salesman then people give him credit for. He ran out on Marquette in the middle of the night and still had their ear to the point where he chose the next coach. In my hood, we call that a bitch slapping.
-
Dimitri, the problem with that is if you doesn't succeed years 3-4, then MU has gone backwards at a time they shouldn't be going backwards. That's where the risk comes in.
Hey wait...we could play that game with anybody.
"if [Tony Bennett] doesn't succeed years 3-4, then MU has gone backwards at a time they shouldn't be going backwards. That's where the risk comes in."
"if [Sean Miller] doesn't succeed years 3-4, then MU has gone backwards at a time they shouldn't be going backwards. That's where the risk comes in."
Any coach that Marquette hired was going to have to recruit like a mad man in order to succeed after this year. Could Bennett or Miller out-recruit Buzz if they were at MU? That's really the only question. We will know how Buzz recruits in a couple years, but even then we won't know if any of the other options you automatically deem "less risky" would have done better.
So, why not give it a rest. Or do we have to hear this ranting for the next 2-3 years until you know for sure how Buzz does?
-
Hey wait...we could play that game with anybody.
"if [Tony Bennett] doesn't succeed years 3-4, then MU has gone backwards at a time they shouldn't be going backwards. That's where the risk comes in."
"if [Sean Miller] doesn't succeed years 3-4, then MU has gone backwards at a time they shouldn't be going backwards. That's where the risk comes in."
Any coach that Marquette hired was going to have to recruit like a mad man in order to succeed after this year. Could Bennett or Miller out-recruit Buzz if they were at MU? That's really the only question. We will know how Buzz recruits in a couple years, but even then we won't know if any of the other options you automatically deem "less risky" would have done better.
So, why not give it a rest. Or do we have to hear this ranting for the next 2-3 years until you know for sure how Buzz does?
Yes we could....but everyone here would feel a lot better on DAY 1 if Miller or Bennett were those guys, even if they failed in years 3-4. It would be a SURPRISE if they failed.
Would it be a surprise if Buzz fails....I'm asking an honest question?
What would Vegas put the odds at a Miller or Bennett failing in years 3-4? 10% For Buzz....I'd say north of 10%.
Let's hope it all works out....to answer your question, Miller is a recruiting dynamo and a good coach. Bennett a good coach that hasn't recruited like gang busters, but it's also tough to recruit to Pullman, Washington.
-
Yes we could....but everyone here would feel a lot better on DAY 1 if Miller or Bennett were those guys, even if they failed in years 3-4. It would be a SURPRISE if they failed.
Would it be a surprise if Buzz fails....I'm asking an honest question?
What would Vegas put the odds at a Miller or Bennett failing in years 3-4? 10% For Buzz....I'd say north of 10%.
Let's hope it all works out....to answer your question, Miller is a recruiting dynamo and a good coach. Bennett a good coach that hasn't recruited like gang busters, but it's also tough to recruit to Pullman, Washington.
The better quote would have been "if [Jim Les | Brad Brownell | Chris Lowrey] doesn't succeed years 3-4 . . . "
And I guarantee that that Vegas would put the odds of any of them > 10% as well.
I think we all agree that Sean Miller or Tony Bennett would have been great choices, and everything I read suggests the job could have been theirs if they wanted it.
The biggest concern I have over a mid-major coach is that they have no experience or connections recruiting the type of players MU will need to be competitive in the Big East--and a big part of that is the relationships with current HS frosh and sophs who will be part of that year 3/year 4 class.
Everyone is whining about Crean targeting the same players he was looking at for MU, but that's exactly what you want when you hire a coach. You want that guy to come in with established recruiting contacts with the type of players you need to be succesful.
The one thing that Buzz has over the others is that he has already been working not just with the TYPE of recruit MU needs, but the exact players that MU has been targeting--not just for 2008, but 2009, 2010, 2011. We absolutly don't want anyone who Brad Brownell is currently targeting. Sorry, but Wright State players won't get it done. I don't think we even want Bradley or SIU type players.
The bottom line is that its a very defensible decision to stay away from mid-major coaches. At the end of the day, you would have preferred more time to interview some of them--but at what potential cost. The biggest risk is that one of them charms the pants off you, you take him, and he turns MU into West Wright State or SIU-North Campus.
And please, don't suggest that Cottingham would be more susceptible to that because of his "inexperience"--an experienced guy like Cords hired Mike Deane.
-
So, why not give it a rest. Or do we have to hear this ranting for the next 2-3 years until you know for sure how Buzz does?
It really doesn't matter how Buzz does. The ranting is over the extent of the alleged "search" that was conducted to replace Crean. Bennett's deal at WSU makes it pretty clear that MU made no serious efforts to hire anyone other than Buzz. Obviously, MU was more concerned with the short-term goal of perserving a mediocre crop of recruits rather than preserving the long-term credibility of the basketball program.
-
The biggest concern I have over a mid-major coach is that they have no experience or connections recruiting the type of players MU will need to be competitive in the Big East--and a big part of that is the relationships with current HS frosh and sophs who will be part of that year 3/year 4 class.
I'm not sure I agree with this. They have many of the same connections, it's just that the players are usually going to go play for a bigger school in a better conference. They still have those relationships. The midmajor coaches are at the same events, talking to the same AAU coaches about players on those teams (but instead of going after player A, they're going after player B).
It's the name on the school that gives them access to the better recruits.
-
Is Pearl the exception to the rule then or is he recruiting the same kids that he would have at UWM?
If you are a recruiter, you can recruit anywhere. A higher profile program gives the recruiter an audience with better athletes.
-
The ranting is over the extent of the alleged "search" that was conducted to replace Crean. Bennett's deal at WSU makes it pretty clear that MU made no serious efforts to hire anyone other than Buzz.
This is the second thread that you've posted that in. Lets clear one thing up:
Bennett did NOT want the job. It had NOTHING to do with the money.
MU Did make serious efforts at a couple of guys, including Bennett. They were not interested. After that, Buzz was the next candidate.
-
This is the second thread that you've posted that in. Lets clear one thing up:
Bennett did NOT want the job. It had NOTHING to do with the money.
MU Did make serious efforts at a couple of guys, including Bennett. They were not interested. After that, Buzz was the next candidate.
+1000
Again, I don't think Bennett's contract is an indication of anything other than he is happy at WSU and didn't want the MU or IU job.
-
This is the second thread that you've posted that in. Lets clear one thing up:
Bennett did NOT want the job. It had NOTHING to do with the money.
MU Did make serious efforts at a couple of guys, including Bennett. They were not interested. After that, Buzz was the next candidate.
Yeah.. From what I understand the deal breaker was that they heard that the contractor service hired to do the coach's landscaping is a bit creepy. ;) The rumors started when bystanders overheard Crean telling Joanie "if we go to Indiana we can start leaving the blinds open again!" while discussing the job opportunity with her. :D
-
This is the second thread that you've posted that in. Lets clear one thing up:
Bennett did NOT want the job. It had NOTHING to do with the money.
MU Did make serious efforts at a couple of guys, including Bennett. They were not interested. After that, Buzz was the next candidate.
Really? Where have read that? I've seen nothing to indicate MU's efforts were "serious" ... whatever that means. I've seen nothing about money offered, length of contract, potential buy-out provisions, etc.
And really, after only a few days "searching," exactly how "serious" could those efforts have been?
Isn't it a more likely scenario that MU made faint overtures to a few of the names that were subjects of media speculation, but were negotiationing in earnest only with Buzz? Wouldn't that explain how Mu could work out the details to Buzz's contract so quickly after allegedly negotiating with the more preferential unnamed "guys" that you referred to?
-
I ain't workin' in no Indiana.
-
My understanding is that both Bennett and Miller werer approached by MU and did not have interest in leaving ther current gigs.
College coaching success being predicated largely, if not totally on recruiting, and Buzz having the rep of being a recruiting demon and already an MU employee = logical hire.
-
This is the second thread that you've posted that in. Lets clear one thing up:
Bennett did NOT want the job. It had NOTHING to do with the money.
MU Did make serious efforts at a couple of guys, including Bennett. They were not interested. After that, Buzz was the next candidate.
Totally agree.....the question is why was he "the next candidate"...but when you're making a decision in 72 hours I guess that limits your options.
Oh well....I do think he hired a good assistant coach....the team should be very good next year....can't wait for it to start.
-
I ain't workin' in no Indiana.
Dat der bush gonna be gettin' big! ;D
-
I heard Joanie is redecorating her new digs.
Now her carpeting doesn't match her drapes and she's contemplating putting in Brazilian hard wood floors. ;D