Only way I am okay with a HCIW type of deal is if we follow the Purdue model.No offense, but that's an awful idea.
Duke had reasons to strive for continuity -- they are recruiting as well as they ever have, and they have fielded top 10 teams 4 of the past 5 years. They don't want that to change, and they have incentive to maintain the status quo.
Our recruiting is average in general -- and below average, compared to our historical program standard. Our on-court results have been below average. And we're trending down on both fronts.
Therein lies the difference. There is no candidate good enough to be named "coach in waiting."
No way. The coaches currently on the staff are all contributing to the dysfunctional product, the poor recruiting, etc. The only thing that will turn this titanic around is an infusion of new ideas and new energy. Not a continuation of the same sorry approach.
Everyone familiar with the definition of insanity? Let's avoid that.
Purdue hired Matt Painter from the outside and let Gene Keady have a sendoff year. Painter was the lead assistant and HCIW he recruited and Keady got 1 last year.
Painter took a demotion for one year for his legendary mentor to have a last year.
If we did that I would be okay with a HCIW but I don’t want a current assistant like Duke and UNC did.