Coach Search Options after Autry

[orangepassion]

So, I am not reaching out to my source because of a friendship with Autry separate from coaching, and I don't want to put said person in a difficult position, although said person has recently criticized calls that Autry has made in game. But I still don't feel comfortable with asking.

So my 2 cents will come from my time on the Alumni Board and all that I learned about how the University and the BOT might view a situation with a large existing donor versus a new donor. Large existing donor is a former player, and a consistent donor. The BOT will most likely assume that if the existing donor doesn't get their wishes here regarding the basketball coach, that said person will still donate, as it is already in their hearts and love of SU to support the school.
However, a new donor means new possibilites. I believe they will look towards the new donor. After all, the goal is to find new people to donate who have not done so before. That is gold to the BOT and all who are involved with fundraising.

I say go with the Donor with the bigger font on the Basketball building

 

[pearl31]

I'm not agreeing that this is how a coach should be chosen, and if anything, I disagree with it. I am just talking about IF they are using that as a deciding factor. And for the 2 above posters who mentioned that it would be a new sport for the Lally's, it is more the bottom line of money coming into the university in any way. So they may still donate anything that may have gone to basketball to football and new money would still come in. I don't think they look at it as money here or there, but money in total that can help SU.

Thanks as always llandz for your info. Wouldn't they also be risking alienating old reliable donor to significantly cut back or even outright stop future donations?

 

[Dinkyspond]

Carl $pangler

 

[llandz]

Thanks as always llandz for your info. Wouldn't they also be risking alienating old reliable donor to significantly cut back or even outright stop future donations?

I think there are ways to make that decision, and still make the donor know that they are the most important person to the university, and to find other ways to make it up to them. But I see this point also. There are risks in anything they decide. They need to weigh the risks. I would think before a final decision is made that a conversation would be had to see if it would cut ties. I also think that if someone is so "small minded" to let it affect their overall love to the university it begs to question how strong that devotion is. No one donor should have total control over decisions.

 

[sufan59]

I think there are ways to make that decision, and still make the donor know that they are the most important person to the university, and to find other ways to make it up to them. But I see this point also. There are risks in anything they decide. They need to weigh the risks. I would think before a final decision is made that a conversation would be had to see if it would cut ties. I also think that if someone is so "small minded" to let it affect their overall love to the university it begs to question how strong that devotion is. No one donor should have total control over decisions.

Well said!

 

[sufan59]

Btw the Curry Hicks Sage poster does research and gets inside knowledge of how this process works. He talks about the importance of donor backing, not necessarily specific to Syracuse, but in general to the process when it comes to who has the advantage in getting the job. Seeming pretty consistent to what insiders are suggesting is happening here, it seems to be quite normal pretty much most places. Regarding Bruce Pearl with the way he left Auburn, he’s not coming back to coach anywhere. Spending retirement doing media engagements and spending time with family I would guess.

 

[SanDiegoCuse]

I like all 4. Don’t think you can go wrong with any of them. Calhoun is interesting. 5 years aa a Huggy Bear assistant and great success at two different schools as a HC. Ohio native.

 

[LAorange44]

Make a go at Pearl. Give him a 3 year contract and then let the new AD bring in his (or her or they/them) guy. 3 years of a proven winner wouldn’t be the worst thing.

 

[sufan59]

 

[qdawgg]

My fear is that we decide to actually hire Hodgson but SU drags their feet. With so many jobs open and getting multiple looks. Hodgson worries he’s going to miss a bigger opportunity and doesn’t want to wait, so he takes a different job.

 

[phil77]

I like all 4. Don’t think you can go wrong with any of them. Calhoun is interesting. 5 years aa a Huggy Bear assistant and great success at two different schools as a HC. Ohio native.

Yup I like all 4 of them, Schertz, Calhoun, Olen, Hodgson, that would be my top 4, and I wouldn't really consider anyone else. I would like to maybe interview Murray and pick his mind a little.

Schertz said no or rumors are he would say no
Olen I think is staying out west or that is the rumor

 

[Frozen]

Make a go at Pearl. Give him a 3 year contract and then let the new AD bring in his (or her or they/them) guy. 3 years of a proven winner wouldn’t be the worst thing.

 

[GoCuse14]

I am actually from Burlington but live in Cedar Rapids now

I live in Oskaloosa, originally from Jamestown area in NY.

 

[kingtidge]

I'm not agreeing that this is how a coach should be chosen, and if anything, I disagree with it. I am just talking about IF they are using that as a deciding factor. And for the 2 above posters who mentioned that it would be a new sport for the Lally's, it is more the bottom line of money coming into the university in any way. So they may still donate anything that may have gone to basketball to football and new money would still come in. I don't think they look at it as money here or there, but money in total that can help SU.

Agreed. Also, wasn't implying you agreed with the premise. Just concerned (as many are) on how decisions are being made. Hopefully they'll be made with careful consideration and objectively.

You look at the hiring of Lyke (for example) and you have to scratch your head... Why did she get a job and is now in the running for AD?? Because she's friends with a BOT spouse?? Is that all it takes? It can't based on her CV and the trainwreck she left at Pitt.

Color me concerned about these upcoming hires and the quality of the decision making process...

 

[LAorange44]

Look what pitino has done for St. John’s

 

[Sherman20]

I think if you look at the top assistants of the current top 5-10 teams we will see at least 1-2 candidates there

Maybe you consider Luke Murray. Maybe. That’s it. If this is true, it’s pretty obvious to me that these are not serious people on the Hill. I’m worried that Syracuse has one of the worst group of BOTs in the country. They’ve overseen the destruction of the basketball program on JB’s watch as he held on far far past his prime, and now they just seem to be flailing around with no direction. There are fantastic proven mid major head coaches that they could consider, and I don’t even see any of their names mentioned here. It’s all Hop, GMac, Syracuse alums, P4 assistant coaches and other awful ideas that shouldn’t even be on the table. And then people suggesting that we’ll just wait for an unknown Fran Brown type to drop out of a tree. We are fools if that’s their plan. Focus on Josh Schertz or Hodgson or other top mid major guy and stop pussyfooting around.

 

[Sherman20]

I wish I could get my friend Jason Leone hired. He can coach. Flat out. One can dream

Yeah, let’s hire the Oswego State coach. good lord. One can dream? Sounds more like a nightmare.

 

[Sherman20]

You cannot say that the administration cares about winning and then at the same time say that Mike Hopkins is a strong candidate to be the next coach and Heather Lyke is a strong candidate to be the next athletic director. That shows the intentions of the administration.

Administrations that care about winning do not consider a coach that was a complete failure and an AD that was disastrous (and worked up a terrible reputation while doing it).

Even if it’s just a small minority that is pushing these ideas, they will absolutely hold us back. You cannot have decision-makers that care more about personal relationships than actually winning games.

It’s like these people have no perspective or awareness at all about optics. You cannot entertain either one of these candidates. Maybe you have a conversation with Hop out of personal respect. That’s it. The fact that insiders are mentioning these two as realistic options means that they’re either being told bad info or we are a joke of an athletic department. Hiring either would get us mocked across the college athletics world. Wildhack needs to level with some of these people about barking up stupid trees.