Is Danny Manning a serious candidate?

[Herman Cain]

Wait! Holtmann went to Michigan??

Ohio ain't the richest in either endowment or AD earnings

1 and 1a. They are both very well off. Ohio State gets a lot of specific gifts to Athletics. Money not an object at either.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Cleveland Browns fired Bill Bellichek.  Lots of good coaches get fired, lots of bad ones too.  KO, on that list was fired pretty much everywhere since. IU fired Crean.  Buzz tends to leave places (UNO, MU) for whatever reason. 

Dukiet and Deane were both head coaches at MU, both were fired. That's the extent of the similarities and if you knew them personally, you would say that was an understatement....whether it was socially, coaching, personality, relationships, etc.  Plus Mike couldn't play the Piano.

I'm going to bow out of this. I have no idea what point you are trying to make any longer. 

[Norm]

I'm going to bow out of this. I have no idea what point you are trying to make any longer.

I think he's trying to say that even good coaches get fired. You put Deane and Dukiet in the same category because they both got fired. There's still a ton of difference between the two in terms of success at Marquette.

[Pakuni]

Why does everyone here lump in Mike Deane with Bob Dukiet, like they were equivalent coaching failures at Marquette? Mike Deane won 100 games faster than any MU coach before him and went to two NCAAs and two NITs. While Deane's recruiting tailed off, he still was a great bench coach and his teams won some big games against the likes of Cincinnati, Louisville, and others that had the Bradley Center rocking. Deane was so much better than Dukiet its an insult to put him at Dukiet's level.

The main difference between Dukiet's and Deane's respective tenures at Marquette is that Deane inherited better players.
Once KO's players were gone, MU went into a tailspi that Cords fortunately brought to an end before things got much worse.
Let's not forget Great Bench Coach Mike Deane went 30 games under .500 at Lamar and Wagner. Or that Great Bench Coach Mike Deane lost to double digit seeds in both his NCAA appearances at MU.

[Pakuni]

Al Davis was AFL coach of the year in 1963 finished with a winning record.  I believe there were others, but your sarcasm is

Fact check: Al Davis didn't own the Raiders in 1963. He didn't own them until the early 70s (he was given a small ownership stake in the late 60s after resigning as AFL Commissioner and returning to Oakland)

[Cheeks]

The main difference between Dukiet's and Deane's respective tenures at Marquette is that Deane inherited better players.
Once KO's players were gone, MU went into a tailspi that Cords fortunately brought to an end before things got much worse.
Let's not forget Great Bench Coach Mike Deane went 30 games under .500 at Lamar and Wagner. Or that Great Bench Coach Mike Deane lost to double digit seeds in both his NCAA appearances at MU.

Yup, recruiting was his issue.  Deane did manage to take three different schools to the NCAA tournament and won over 430 college basketball games.  Good coach, not a great recruiter.

Siena
Marquette
Lamar

He missed out taking Wagner in '05 when he got Wagner as the 6 seed to the finals of the NEC, but lost by six.  A few years later they were the two seed, but only got to the semis.

[Herman Cain]

The main difference between Dukiet's and Deane's respective tenures at Marquette is that Deane inherited better players.
Once KO's players were gone, MU went into a tailspi that Cords fortunately brought to an end before things got much worse.
Let's not forget Great Bench Coach Mike Deane went 30 games under .500 at Lamar and Wagner. Or that Great Bench Coach Mike Deane lost to double digit seeds in both his NCAA appearances at MU.

Deane lifetime coaching record 412-308. Took 4 teams to NCAA tournament. Took teams at 3 different schools to NCAA tournament.  Was he a great coach ? No. But definitely in a much different class than Dukiet.

I thought Deane did a solid job at MU and maintained the momentum from KO. Thankfully , Cords saw the wheels were coming off the recruiting wagon and took decisive action before any real damage could occur.

[Cheeks]

Fact check: Al Davis didn't own the Raiders in 1963. He didn't own them until the early 70s (he was given a small ownership stake in the late 60s after resigning as AFL Commissioner and returning to Oakland)

I stand corrected....he was GM and Coach when he first started.  Later AFL commissioner. 

The others I referenced, Peggy Parratt was one....threw the first forward pass legally....owned and coached the Cleveland Tigers. Doc Young was another.  Leo Lyons another. Etc.  Coached and owned in the NFL.

[Galway Eagle]

Spin is telling the truth? Wow. OK.  Well, uhm I said 5 of 6 winning records.  That would be 100% accurate, just like I said.  Not sure how truth and facts are spinning, but hey it's 2019.

No spin is selecting which truthful facts you presented in order to present it as an example that proves your point. You were completely honest but selected a way to present hickey as a successful coaching hire because it fit your narrative. You did not mention that only one, maybe the 18-8 regular season also, would be considered successful seasons by anyone on this board. The overall record is extremely padded by those the 61 year and the NIT year. You also failed to mention that his most successful year was his first year, and as we all know you would be first person on this board to say "wait 4-5yrs to judge because those aren't his players".

Ed Hickey was not a bust by any means but to use him as a successful example of hiring an established coach is a joke.

[Uncle Rico]

This is the quintessential scoop thread and should be on its tombstone

[Cheeks]

No spin is selecting which truthful facts you presented in order to present it as an example that proves your point. You were completely honest but selected a way to present hickey as a successful coaching hire because it fit your narrative. You did not mention that only one, maybe the 18-8 regular season also, would be considered successful seasons by anyone on this board. The overall record is extremely padded by those the 61 year and the NIT year. You also failed to mention that his most successful year was his first year, and as we all know you would be first person on this board to say "wait 4-5yrs to judge because those aren't his players".

Ed Hickey was not a bust by any means but to use him as a successful example of hiring an established coach is a joke.

He was not a successful hiring example?  a joke?  Three tournaments in his first five years and a winning percentage of .640 until his last season?

He took over for Nagle who in his last two years did not have a winning record, yet in Hickey’s first went 23-6.  My 4 to 5 years philosophy is a marker to FULLY judge a coach so they can get a full class of matriculating players through.  I have no idea about the roster makeup of Hickey’s first team, how many were holdovers or how many were his....do you?

Oh, forgot to mention....he’s in the Naismith Basketball hall of fame and the college basketball hall of fame.

Yeah, I would say he was not a bust, but where we strongly disagree is your assertion that he wasn’t a successful hire, a joke.  Hardly.

[Galway Eagle]

He was not a successful hiring example?  a joke?  Three tournaments in his first five years and a winning percentage of .640 until his last season?

Oh, forgot to mention....he’s in the Naismith Basketball hall of fame and the college basketball hall of fame.

Yeah, I would say he was not a bust, but where we strongly disagree is your assertion that he wasn’t a successful hire, a joke.  Hardly.

Is 23-6 a good season? Yes, did we make the postseason? Yes. were these his players? No
Is 13-12 a good season? No, did we make the postseason? No. were these his players? No
Is 16-11 a good season? No, did we make the postseason? Yes. were these his players? Some.
Is 15-11 a good season? No, did we have a post season? No. were these his players? Mostly.
Is 20-9 a good season? Yes, did we have a postseason? Yes. were these his players? Yes
Is 5-21 a good season?  No. did we have a postseason? No. were these his players? Yes.

It's a simple analysis but it displays every fact about him without spinning it to fit a narrative. In that analysis I'm seeing a heck of a lot of nos and only one of them is debatable whether 16-11 was a good season. 

I'd also say he's in the HOF due to SLU and . CU more than MU.

[Cheeks]

Is 23-6 a good season? Yes, did we make the postseason? No. were these his players? No
Is 13-12 a good season? No, did we make the postseason? No. were these his players? No
Is 16-11 a good season? No, did we make the postseason? Yes. were these his players? Some.
Is 15-11 a good season? No, did we have a post season? No. were these his players? Mostly.
Is 20-9 a good season? Yes, did we have a postseason? Yes. were these his players? Yes
Is 5-21 a good season?  No. did we have a postseason? No. were these his players? Yes.

It's a simple analysis but it displays every fact about him without spinning it to fit a narrative. In that analysis I'm seeing a heck of a lot of nos and only one of them is debatable whether 16-11 was a good season. 

I'd also say he's in the HOF due to SLU and . CU more than MU.

Half of his ncaa appearances were at MU.

He won national coach of the year honors while at MU.

Year 3 they go 16-11 and get an at large bid to the NCAA tournament, one of only 24 teams invited.....that is not a successful season.  Wow. 

Hickey was a brilliant strategist and tactician, but stubborn and difficult to play for.  No nonsense military man. 

[Galway Eagle]

Half of his ncaa appearances were at MU.

He won national coach of the year honors while at MU.

Year 3 they go 16-11 and get an at large bid to the NCAA tournament, one of only 24 teams invited.....that is not a successful season.  Wow. 

Hickey was a brilliant strategist and tactician, but stubborn and difficult to play for.  No nonsense military man.

1) The NIT was arguably the better tournament or at least on par with the NCAA tournament at this point in time.

2) He won national coach of the year honours with Nagle's players. I don't know why this is hard to grasp you've used this argument with Buzz 100 times over. If Buzz won NCOY in 08-09 you would have said he inherited 4 of the best players we've had since Al.

3) Was Wojo's year three a successful season? Average record, blown out in the NCAA tournament, not entirely his players. I enjoyed that season but I wouldn't call it a successful season overall, just a meh forgettable year and I would compare that to Hickey going 16-11.

4) I'm not arguing he was not a brilliant strategist, he's in the HOF and did great at SLU and CU but if your point is hiring an established coach is a better option and you want to use an example, I don't think Hickey is a good one and I maintain that you spun it to be that way in your initial post about him while leaving out any of the many counterpoints.

[Cheeks]

1) The NIT was arguably the better tournament or at least on par with the NCAA tournament at this point in time.

2) He won national coach of the year honours with Nagle's players. I don't know why this is hard to grasp you've used this argument with Buzz 100 times over. If Buzz won NCOY in 08-09 you would have said he inherited 4 of the best players we've had since Al.

3) Was Wojo's year three a successful season? Average record, blown out in the NCAA tournament, not entirely his players. I enjoyed that season but I wouldn't call it a successful season overall, just a meh forgettable year and I would compare that to Hickey going 16-11.

4) I'm not arguing he was not a brilliant strategist, he's in the HOF and did great at SLU and CU but if your point is hiring an established coach is a better option and you want to use an example, I don't think Hickey is a good one and I maintain that you spun it to be that way in your initial post about him while leaving out any of the many counterpoints.

Nagle got nothing out of those guys compared to Hickey.  And he kept putting out winning seasons.  I said Buzz did a great job and should win coach of the year early in his career...Buzz also took over a ncaa team with all seniors.  Hickey took over a team that that didn’t have a winning season in three years, and was barely over .500 in that winning season.  Your Buzz comparisons and what I said are off base and incorrect.  Hickey didn’t take over a team that was already in the NCAA tournament like Buzz did.  I thought Buzz’s second year was an amazing coaching job and said it often.  I don’t know why this is so hard for you to grasp the differences in the two situations. They are not at all alike.

The NIT by this time was no longer as important, it definitely was in the early days of the NCAA tournament.  Look at the ranked teams that went to the ncaa tournament in the 1960’s vs the NIT to prove that out.

Wojo’s third year was a success.  MU and USC were tied with 10 minutes left in the game and a two possession game if I recall with under 7 ( going off memory ), and then they got blown....oh by the way to a team that went to the Final Four.

[Jon]

The main difference between Dukiet's and Deane's respective tenures at Marquette is that Deane inherited better players.

Incorrect. The primary difference is that while Bob Dukiet played the Lounge Lizard score Mike Deane was the Lounge Lizard. Deane was an inveterate philanderer who established his bona fides after the lights went out in the gym.

I met Paula several times and often wondered the how and why of her marriage. Dino was an equal opportunity womanizer who liked them thick and thin, young and old, short and tall, flat and stacked, dumb and smart, black and white, blonde and brunette.

Deane gets a lot of undeserved praise for being a "great game coach."

Fact is, the only things Mike Deane excelled at was drinking, panty sniffng, and ass biting.

 

[Lennys Tap]

No spin is selecting which truthful facts you presented in order to present it as an example that proves your point.

+1 Chico is the consummate spinmeister. Picks his conclusion, gives the facts that support it and ignores those that contradict it. Throws in a few red herrings along the way to confuse or obfuscate. He missed his calling - should have been a "guest contributor" on Fox News or MSNBC as he stubbornly recites his talking points.

As you point out, most of Ed Hickey's LIMITED success at MU was due to his predecessor's players. He left Marquette in a worse spot than even Bob Dukiet. If his hiring (60+ years ago?) is the best and only example of "success" for MU by hiring a D1 coach...we can all rest our case.

[Cheeks]

+1 Chico is the consummate spinmeister. Picks his conclusion, gives the facts that support it and ignores those that contradict it. Throws in a few red herrings along the way to confuse or obfuscate. He missed his calling - should have been a "guest contributor" on Fox News or MSNBC as he stubbornly recites his talking points.

As you point out, most of Ed Hickey's LIMITED success at MU was due to his predecessor's players. He left Marquette in a worse spot than even Bob Dukiet. If his hiring (60+ years ago?) is the best and only example of "success" for MU by hiring a D1 coach...we can all rest our case.

The players quit on him his last year, they hated his authoritarian style.  It allowed a guy named McGuire to become head coach.

LIMITED success at MU....classic.   Half of the man’s NCAA appearances came at MU and a national coach of the year.  Worse spot than Dukiet....classic.  Dukiet had one winning year in three seasons, Hickey 5 in 6 years....classic.

[Pakuni]

Incorrect. The primary difference is that while Bob Dukiet played the Lounge Lizard score Mike Deane was the Lounge Lizard. Deane was an inveterate philanderer who established his bona fides after the lights went out in the gym.

I met Paula several times and often wondered the how and why of her marriage. Dino was an equal opportunity womanizer who liked them thick and thin, young and old, short and tall, flat and stacked, dumb and smart, black and white, blonde and brunette.

Deane gets a lot of undeserved praise for being a "great game coach."

Fact is, the only things Mike Deane excelled at was drinking, panty sniffng, and ass biting.

Fair.

[Pakuni]

Yup, recruiting was his issue.  Deane did manage to take three different schools to the NCAA tournament and won over 430 college basketball games.  Good coach, not a great recruiter.

The "three different teams" thing is a fluke. A sub-.500 Lamar team (made up of the previous coach's players) got hot at the right time and won their conference tourney. That's hardly a testament to Deane's body of work there. He went 40-46 over his next three seasons and then 20 games under .500 at Wagner.
One would think a "great bench coach" would have had more success at those lower levels where you get four-years to develop players and fit them into your system. He didn't.
He was a bad recruiter and mediocre coach.

[MU82]

MU and USC were tied with 10 minutes left in the game and a two possession game if I recall with under 7 ( going off memory ), and then they got blown

Well, at least they lost with smiles on their faces.

[tower912]

I remember games in the forties.I remember non stars getting yanked if their guy scored.  I remember him losing his crap as Providence rolled MU in the tournament.  I remember him basically saying MU should be content to be a mid major.

If you could handle the baggage and temper, having him as an assistant in charge of the defense wouldn't be so bad.   A head coach?  No.

[Pakuni]

I remember games in the forties.I remember non stars getting yanked if their guy scored.  I remember him losing his crap as Providence rolled MU in the tournament.  I remember him basically saying MU should be content to be a mid major.

If you could handle the baggage and temper, having him as an assistant in charge of the defense wouldn't be so bad.   A head coach?  No.

Burning time outs 45 seconds into games wasn't a brilliant coaching tactic?

[JakeBarnes]

So are we hiring Danny Manning or what?

[tower912]

Burning time outs 45 seconds into games wasn't a brilliant coaching tactic?

Down 2-0