[Cracked Sidewalks] Cottingham details 'the process'

[jce]

Pakuni---My point is that there are 500 people that could replace Wild and be successful. He did not invent fundraising. Lets compare fundraising pre Wade and post Wade. People give money to winners. If MU was bottom 25 team does Strong write the same checks? Does Keyes give $7 million? Both are MAJOR MU basketball fans. Keyes has been going to games for decades.

Keyes was giving money to MU long before the basketball program was as successful as it recently has been.  He clearly didn't invent fundraising, but he developed an atmosphere and the vision that inspires donors.  I am positive that Zilber and others donations were more inspired by Wild than what they have seen on the BB court.

[jce]

jce---Look at the hire. That is UWW comparison. No other D1 program had any inclination to contact Buzz. Why did Cottingham? Because he does not know anything about running a D1 program.

OK....so the problem you have *isn't* with the process, it is with the hire.  That's fine.  As someone mentioned earlier, if Cottingham hired Larry Brown after one and only one interview, no one would care about the process.  I think that is the point of this entire thread

[IrwinFletcher]

And you may not like it, but none of us want him to fail.....your insinuations to the contrary.


You want to know what I think really happened, MU was shot down by Bennett and Miller so fast it made their heads spin.  They then decided they didn't want to go through being shot down again so they went with someone they knew would never say no because he was in no position to say no.

So instead of having a set of balls, they went for the easy hire.  Damage control essentially.  They didn't want to be turned down again.

I'd bet my house that's what happened and from what I've been able to find out internally, my house isn't going anywhere.  So yes, it's still about process....he became default guy because they didn't want to be harmed or preceived to turned down.  Wow, what a great "process" to hire your next coach.  Instead of saying "we don't give a crap" if that happens (a few folks turning you down), you keep going through the process.

I remember UCLA being humbled by 5 guys saying no and people were ripping on UCLA as a result.  They ended up with Harrick who just happened to win a national title.  They kept to it.

I remember USC being turned down time and again, they kept to it and hire Pete Carroll.  It took them a month to hire him, including being turned down by plenty, taking some cheap shots but so what....they had a stomach to try to get the best guy they could.  They went after Billotti...and that fell through.  They went after Erickson...that fell through.  They went after Riley...that fell through.  They got their 4th choice, some guy named Pete Carroll.

MU cowered after the first two said no and so quickly and they ran for cover. 

I love MU as much as the next guy, but comparing our program to USC football is not apples to apples.  They have much more tradition and success than we have had.  Maybe we couldn't afford to take the PR hit becasue it would have made us look real bad to recruits as we struggle to maintain our solid position in the Big EAst Hoops race.  Imagine if we were turned down by 5 coaches, what the other BE coaches (and Bo) would say about us on the recruiting trail.

[detroitwarrior]

Worse than the process was the manner in which Cottingham introduced the new Head Coach at the press conference....Junior Varsity introduction handing Buzz a baseball cap without enthusiasm and clearly demonstrating Cottingham is in over his head in all aspects of being an AD.

[Henry Sugar]

CrackedSidewalks isn't one voice, but many voices.  There are disagreements with the various writers there, to say CS wants Buzz to fail is the epitome of stupidity.  No one wants him to fail that writes for CS, and secondly not everyone that writes for CS even agrees it was a poor process.  Several writers do, but not CS as a whole since CS isn't taking any stance...just one writer (NY Warrior's) opinion.

co-sign

[THEGYMBAR]

jce---You take things out of context. If they had a process that was D1 worthy they never would have hired Buzz. It is not the hire. It is the fact they were so far out of their league they did not know what to do.

Regarding fundraising, you are either Fr. Wild or delusional. Keyes was never a seven figure donor until recently. You believe what you want to believe. Wild could be replaced by 500 other people. If you think he is something more than what he actually is keep drinking the KoolAide. No offense on Wild but we could go a year without replacing him. Trying doing that with a basketball coach. We went a year without AD....an unfortunately it looks like another 10 years without one.

[NYWarrior]

Double agree.  CrackedSidewalks and the others want Buzz to fail so they can come back to us people who have never been involved in "process" and tell us they were right. It is a shame that fans and alums refuse to get behind this coach and program. 

Hilarious.....since there is nothing in my CS post to indicate a lack of support for Buzz Williams or the basketball program.  Who knew that questioning the decision-making of the institution constituted a refusal "to get behind this coach and program." MU ain't the Ministry of Truth.

Folks read what they want to read, I guess.

[Chicago_inferiority_complexes]

That's just nutty right there.

20 or so years ago, you could probably say that about college basketball and colleges.

I'm not so sure anymore.

Basketball/sports as a marketing tool is just so big now.

[rocky_warrior]

You want to know what I think really happened, MU was shot down by Bennett and Miller so fast it made their heads spin. 
{snip}
I'd bet my house that's what happened
{snip}
MU cowered after the first two said no and so quickly and they ran for cover. 

Hmmm, if they taxes on your house weren't so high I'd take that bet.   I got a call the morning of April 2 from a guy who knows some things.  He told me MU had a short list of "big name" coaches they were going to contact (no more than 4).  Buzz was on the  list right after them.  If they struck out with the name guys, then it was likely going to be Buzz unless his interviews didn't go well.

So, it happened just like I expected - they followed the process I heard about in advance.  Maybe I should have shared my knowledge here, and then the process wouldn't have taken you by surprise so much.

Why is it so hard to fathom -- they had a process.  They had a short list. Buzz was on the short list.  Buzz got hired.

Of course, despite your arguing, you're saying that you don't think Buzz should have been on the short list.  You don't care if he got interviewed, and you'll support him, but your opinion is really that he should not have been that high on Marquette's list.   

[Pakuni]

And you may not like it, but none of us want him to fail.....your insinuations to the contrary.
 

With all due respect, Chico's, you are entirely full of (expletive for feces). I've never once said, implied, hinted or insinuated that you or anyone else wishes failure upon Buzz Williams. If you can show otherwise, please do so. Otherwise, please stop your ridiculous insinuations.

And really, Jim Harrick is an example you come up with? I'd rather see Marquette finish 16th in the Big East for the next decade than see my alma mater associate itself with someone the caliber of Jim Harrick.

By the way, you're also full of (expletive for feces) on your recollection of Pete Carroll's hiring. The process didn't last a month and USC was turned down exactly the same number of times as Marquette was before hiring Buzz.

Math, Chico's style:
MU turned down three times, turns to fourth choice = PANIC!
USC turned down three times, turns to fourth choice: Stomach.

It's also worth noting, though, that fickle alumni ripped Carroll's hiring the same way fickle alumni are ripping Buzz's hiring, and they too questioned whether the school's AD had a clue.
But, as we've seen proven time and again, fickle alumni know so much about how to operate an athletic program.  

[jce]

jce---You take things out of context. If they had a process that was D1 worthy they never would have hired Buzz. It is not the hire. It is the fact they were so far out of their league they did not know what to do.

Regarding fundraising, you are either Fr. Wild or delusional. Keyes was never a seven figure donor until recently. You believe what you want to believe. Wild could be replaced by 500 other people. If you think he is something more than what he actually is keep drinking the KoolAide. No offense on Wild but we could go a year without replacing him. Trying doing that with a basketball coach. We went a year without AD....an unfortunately it looks like another 10 years without one.

The question isn't who's more replaceable.  The question isn't who the University could go the longest without.  The question is what position is more important to the University.  If Buzz is an absolute failure at his job, but Fr. Wild is excellent at his, MU is in better shape than vice versa.

And Keyes was not a seven figure donor.  No doubt.  Generally you don't make more than one seven million gift in your lifetime.  But Keyes was on the Board of Trustees for years...in fact I think he was on the Board when I was in school in the late 80s.

[jce]

20 or so years ago, you could probably say that about college basketball and colleges.

I'm not so sure anymore.

Basketball/sports as a marketing tool is just so big now.

The problem is that you are only seeing the external part.  Running the institution is much more important...you just don't see it.

[THEGYMBAR]

jce---Let's agree to disagree. FYI---I do hope Buzz succeeds and the program goes to higher levels.

[ChicosBailBonds]

That is your opinion. 

And how many times have we seen it written that it is embarrassing for a program when they are turned down multiple times (Providence).

Yeah, Providence landed the national coach of the year....how embarrassing.   

[ChicosBailBonds]

With all due respect, Chico's, you are entirely full of (expletive for feces). I've never once said, implied, hinted or insinuated that you or anyone else wishes failure upon Buzz Williams. If you can show otherwise, please do so. Otherwise, please stop your ridiculous insinuations.

And really, Jim Harrick is an example you come up with? I'd rather see Marquette finish 16th in the Big East for the next decade than see my alma mater associate itself with someone the caliber of Jim Harrick.

By the way, you're also full of (expletive for feces) on your recollection of Pete Carroll's hiring. The process didn't last a month and USC was turned down exactly the same number of times as Marquette was before hiring Buzz.

Math, Chico's style:
MU turned down three times, turns to fourth choice = PANIC!
USC turned down three times, turns to fourth choice: Stomach.

It's also worth noting, though, that fickle alumni ripped Carroll's hiring the same way fickle alumni are ripping Buzz's hiring, and they too questioned whether the school's AD had a clue.
But, as we've seen proven time and again, fickle alumni know so much about how to operate an athletic program. 

Jim Harrick had no NCAA issues until the end of his UCLA career....he was squeaky clean when hired so to use a Monday Morning QB application there is just wrong.

As for the math example, you forgot to figure in the time...USC turned down 3 times and waited 28 days...MU turned down 4 times and waited 48 hours....PANIC.

As for the fickle alumni, that is correct, that will always happen...but at least they took their time and got it right.

There is something to be said about taking your time to do something to get it right....but that's right, by questioning the timing and the process it really means I and others want Buzz to fail...talk about a load of feces.  Good Jesus Christ.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Hmmm, if they taxes on your house weren't so high I'd take that bet.   I got a call the morning of April 2 from a guy who knows some things.  He told me MU had a short list of "big name" coaches they were going to contact (no more than 4).  Buzz was on the  list right after them.  If they struck out with the name guys, then it was likely going to be Buzz unless his interviews didn't go well.

So, it happened just like I expected - they followed the process I heard about in advance.  Maybe I should have shared my knowledge here, and then the process wouldn't have taken you by surprise so much.

Why is it so hard to fathom -- they had a process.  They had a short list. Buzz was on the short list.  Buzz got hired.

Of course, despite your arguing, you're saying that you don't think Buzz should have been on the short list.  You don't care if he got interviewed, and you'll support him, but your opinion is really that he should not have been that high on Marquette's list.   

MU got turned down quickly by Bennett, Miller, Davidson's coach, Grant and supposedly Hewitt (though I haven't been able to confirm that one)....they then went into panic mode because of the recruiting situation.  Was Buzz always on the list?  Yes....I never said he wasn't.  Nor did I say he shouldn't have been....but when the no's were piling up from other schools, they went into panic mode quickly...too quickly.  Buzz should have been fallback option way down the list.  They started worrying about the recruits going away.  Other Midwest head coaches that had actually been to the NCAAs, etc....they weren't interviewed or contacted for a number of reasons...including the lovely "didn't fit".  That I will never understand.

My house is just fine.

I just want to know how in the first two days here was the criteria

Winning Head Coaching Experience
NCAA Tournament Experience
Good Recruiter as head coach


Then the criteria quickly became....day ten...fine...day two?  Give me a break.

Non-winning Head Coaching Experience
No NCAA Tournament Experience
Good Recruiter as assistant coach

[ChicosBailBonds]

jce---Let's agree to disagree. FYI---I do hope Buzz succeeds and the program goes to higher levels.

MAJOR +1  (but you know deep down I want him to fail....   )

[THEGYMBAR]

Chico's---If I knew they would do something right if Buzz failed I might have different opinion. My gut tells me this might be Cottinghams best hire, provided he gets another chance. If Buzz fails and fails quickly all of TC's foundation is gone. We cannot afford the risk.

[ChicosBailBonds]

With all due respect, Chico's, you are entirely full of (expletive for feces). I've never once said, implied, hinted or insinuated that you or anyone else wishes failure upon Buzz Williams. If you can show otherwise, please do so. Otherwise, please stop your ridiculous insinuations.

It must be that "passive aggressive" leap of faith interpretation psychobabble analysis you taught me a week ago....just playing the same game with you.   

[ChicosBailBonds]

Chico's---If I knew they would do something right if Buzz failed I might have different opinion. My gut tells me this might be Cottinghams best hire, provided he gets another chance. If Buzz fails and fails quickly all of TC's foundation is gone. We cannot afford the risk.

I think Buzz has a great chance of succeeding....also believe he can succeed and we all want him to succeed.  My issue has always been that if MU was in the toilet again, this hire makes sense from day one.  When MU is not in the toilet, which they weren't, then it's risky....doesn't mean it won't work out, but it's risky.  That opinion is shared by many national pundits and others....but you know that means we want him to fail, hey Irwin?   

[CharleTheJesuit]

Give it 5 years.

As much as I hate to say it, MU could have taken a lesson from St. Louis U's presser for the Majerus hire.

They could have looked it up on YouTube.  Much more impressive.  More enthusiasm and did what a press conference was supposed to do: get the national press out.  Impressive speakes, backdrop, projection.

Good luck. 

[79Warrior]

Yep. That's what I've been saying for three weeks. I think it's very safe to assume that the process zealots around here wouldn't blink had MU hired Sean Miller or Tony Bennett without first conducting a "national search" over several weeks.

Hardly the same comparision. with Bennett or miller MU would have a proven, established coach. To turn the program over to an unproven assistant is completely different. MU has taken a huge gamble.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Hardly the same comparision. with Bennett or miller MU would have a proven, established coach. To turn the program over to an unproven assistant is completely different. MU has taken a huge gamble.

You obviously want Buzz to fail.   

[Pakuni]

Jim Harrick had no NCAA issues until the end of his UCLA career....he was squeaky clean when hired so to use a Monday Morning QB application there is just wrong.

You're dead wrong on this one. Pick up a copy of "Raw Recruits" by Alexander Wolff and Armen Keteyian. Harrick was shady from the outset at UCLA, and I kind of doubt he just woke up one morning in Westwood and decided to be that way.

As for the math example, you forgot to figure in the time...USC turned down 3 times and waited 28 days...MU turned down 4 times and waited 48 hours....PANIC.

More fuzzy math, Chico's style.

Paul Hackett fired -- Nov. 27, 2000.
Pete Carroll introduced as new coach -- Dec. 15, 2000.
That's 18, not 28 days.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/college/news/2000/12/15/usc_carroll_ap/

Who is this mysterious fourth coach who turned down Marquette? What's your source for this?
And, if true, doesn't that only invalidate your argument that MU didn't conduct a thorough enough search? With how many candidates must the administration speak before you consider it a thorough search.
It's funny you consider USC contacting three coaches a "thorough" search, but MU contacting four is a rushed process. Love that kind of consistency.

[Pakuni]

It must be that "passive aggressive" leap of faith interpretation psychobabble analysis you taught me a week ago....just playing the same game with you.   

Actually, your comments re: me claiming you want Buzz to fail are more an example of delusional paranoia.