How much say should our new HC have in our AD and President hires?

[Skatastrophy]

There is a big unknown at Marquette right now. No Head Coach of the MBB team, no Athletic Director and no University President.

The Head Coach, it seems, will be the first to be hired. How much of a say should Cords and Fr. Wild promise to our incoming coach regarding the hiring decision of his future boss and +1?

Would that be a danger to our university's long-term health giving a Basketball Coach that much power? Would it be worth the risk to allay the fears of a big-name hire that's on the fence?

[GoldenWarrior11]

Zero say.

As much as we love our Marquette basketball, the school is much, MUCH, more.

However, the fact that Fr. Wild and Cords would endorse the new head coach to the incoming administration, should be enough for them.  Wild and Cords have done a phenomenal job (as both interim and full-time leaders), and they (the new guys) would be wise to follow their lead.

[GB Warrior]

None. This is a university first and foremost. It is not for the coach to have a hand in what will ultimately determine the strategic vision for the University for the next several decades, will see the hiring of a new provost and several deans. As much as we like to pretend otherwise, coaches owe very little to our school, and we certainly don't owe something like that in return

[ChicosBailBonds]

 I have seen way too many instances where the AD being a rubber stamp for the powerful coach leads to significant problems down the road.  Causes issues with other sports at the school, definitely causes issues on authority if there is no perceived checks and balances in place.

That doesn't mean the HC shouldn't be involved in the process, all the coaches of every sport should be and will be.  The problem I have is when the coach gets to pick the AD, and that has happened before.  At IU with Knight and it was an unmitigated disaster.  It has happened countless times over the years at other schools.

Coaches roll for President...minimal IMO.

[Skatastrophy]

Hyperbole time: If Coach K tentatively accepted an offer from Marquette with the condition that he wants a say in who the AD is going to be, would we turn him down?

[Avenue Commons]

Absolutely zero.

[Tugg Speedman]

If he has more than 0.00%, I will stop my donations and recommend your kids transfer.

Crappy universities, I mean really crappy universities, will take input for a professional basketball coach that will be at that school no more than 10 years, and probably less.  The coach only has his interest in mind (more money, better faculties, lower academic standards, more leeway on arrests of players) and not the University.

very very bad idea

[ChicosBailBonds]

Hyperbole time: If Coach K tentatively accepted an offer from Marquette with the condition that he wants a say in who the AD is going to be, would we turn him down?

Interesting question. Depends who the AD is.  If it is his personal attorney like Bobby Knight had setup...hell no.  If it is an established AD, credible on all counts, has a history of being a great AD at other schools, then maybe.

[Skatastrophy]

Interesting question. Depends who the AD is.  If it is his personal attorney like Bobby Knight had setup...hell no.  If it is an established AD, credible on all counts, has a history of being a great AD at other schools, then maybe.

I think that's reasonable.

[Tugg Speedman]

Interesting question. Depends who the AD is.  If it is his personal attorney like Bobby Knight had setup...hell no.  If it is an established AD, credible on all counts, has a history of being a great AD at other schools, then maybe.

If an established coach wants his own lackey as AD, or wants the duel title of HC and AD, why?  He knows the rules and the vision the university has.  If he feels the need to set it up so he can work by his own rules, be afraid, be very afraid.

[jsglow]

Essentially zero direct input.  That's why you hire a guy with a very solid track record.  Ben Howland is borderline HOF.  No need for a future President or AD to worry about unless there were some extreme irregularities with the program at some time.

[mu03eng]

Essentially zero direct input.  That's why you hire a guy with a very solid track record.  Ben Howland is borderline HOF.  No need for a future President or AD to worry about unless there were some extreme irregularities with the program at some time.

Zero input, and this is why a Howland hire makes maybe the most sense(not sexiest of course).  Howland will bring stability to the program for at least a couple of years allowing the new AD and prez to settle in and own the new Marquette paradigm as well as the basketball program.  If Howland is successful and wants to stay great, if he decides to move on in the next 3 or 4 years fine MU is presumably in a much more stable place to make that higher.

[willie warrior]

I have seen way too many instances where the AD being a rubber stamp for the powerful coach leads to significant problems down the road.  Causes issues with other sports at the school, definitely causes issues on authority if there is no perceived checks and balances in place.

That doesn't mean the HC shouldn't be involved in the process, all the coaches of every sport should be and will be.  The problem I have is when the coach gets to pick the AD, and that has happened before.  At IU with Knight and it was an unmitigated disaster.  It has happened countless times over the years at other schools.

Coaches roll for President...minimal IMO.

Coach should have input for AD--not approval--for buy in purposes. No on University President.
Been HR Director for over 30 years, buy in from subordinates is important.

[Pakuni]

1. A little
2. None