Potential JB successors

[HRE Otto IV]

No. Its based on over 40 years of running a significant corporation. When you have over 50 years of success achieved by Danforth and JB. 50 years of relationships. 50 years of students, coaches, administrators, HS relationships, donors, and 50 plus years of players that love the program you transition the CEO position to an insider. The only time any successful organization should even consider burning down and 50 years of unprecedented success is if the organization is being acquired or merged.
Going outside is extremely dangerous. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that another coach from outside the organization will have success. Zero, none. The fact is that at a bare minimum by going outside 50 years of foundation will be seriously altered. With a strong chance destroyed.
I have followed this plan for over 40 years and had excellent success.
SU should 100% stay in house. The only decision is between the 3 candidates.

That is all fine and dandy if we had 50 years of success. It is more like 40 years of success with 10 years of being a dying company. So why hire internally when the internal hires were not here during the successful era and were a big part of the decline? You conveniently keep ignoring that last 8 seasons. Do you think it is still 2014?\

Edit

Also you analogy doesn't hold water.

What we have is like a private company where the CEO father built the company, and it has declined in his old age. His three sons aren't really qualified to take over. His oldest son (Hop) at one time looked promising but when he was in charge while daddy was sick, the company took a downturn. When he went off to run a company on his own (Washington), he failed. So why bring that son back? His youngest son (GMac) has a celebrity public persona but only has a job because of daddy. He couldn't get hired by another company. The middle son (Red) at this point has the best resume but even daddy seems to prefer the other 2 sons. Middle son syndrome.

Now a public company with an aging CEO would not have his sons right underneath him. That nepotism wouldn't ever be allowed. The internal candidates would be there because they are the most qualified not because they are related to the CEO. That is not the case at SU. In any case the company has been in a downturn the last decade and the shareholders (fans) would not be happy hiring internally when an obvious change is needed.

 

[Bayside44]

Hire Oats on Monday and end this recent nightmare.

We are Nebraska Football right now that dude will immediately inject talent and high recruits and he has upstate NY ties. Hes kinda an A hole which is perfect like a younger Boeheim.

We can still lose to Notre Dame, and pay 10 mil to Bama just for the honor of paying him.

 

[Rage4CUSE]

Go the Deion route and hire Carmelo. Get solid assistants and watch what type of recruits are in the mix. Extremely hot take but I would sign up for it in a second ...

This has potential IMO. Melo has been coming off the bench a lot over the last several years. So he's got a lot more experience than other former Superstars being on the bench and watching the game unfold.

 

[RF2044]

No. Its based on over 40 years of running a significant corporation. When you have over 50 years of success achieved by Danforth and JB. 50 years of relationships. 50 years of students, coaches, administrators, HS relationships, donors, and 50 plus years of players that love the program you transition the CEO position to an insider. The only time any successful organization should even consider burning down and 50 years of unprecedented success is if the organization is being acquired or merged.
Going outside is extremely dangerous. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that another coach from outside the organization will have success. Zero, none. The fact is that at a bare minimum by going outside 50 years of foundation will be seriously altered. With a strong chance destroyed.
I have followed this plan for over 40 years and had excellent success.
SU should 100% stay in house. The only decision is between the 3 candidates.

So, you're afraid of risk, and don't recognize that risk also yields opportunity. You point out that there is no evidence to suggest that an outsider will have success, but can't bring yourself to face the reality that the same is true of the inside candidates.

And you can't articulate any qualifications for the incumbent three, beyond "continuity," but your gut tells you that they'll be adequate, even though the program is on extended period of decline, and change is needed.

Got it.

 

[Fly Rodder]

Matt Langel is very impressive. He’s going to get a P5 job sooner rather than later.

 

[Red Holzman]

8 years of decline -and expect trend to continue unless SU wins big in the portal.
I want something new/different when JB retires.
I honor JB's legacy and appreciate his former stars/assistants, but want a complete overhaul/refresh of the program.
I'm weary of the 2-3 -the center covering the corners, open 3's, not boxing out. I'm weary of iso offense.
Roll the dice on a hire that generates excitement for fans/recruits and give us something new.

If all about staying in house, prefer the risk of Bulldog's proposed flyer on Melo for the huge Splash Factor and see how that goes.

 

[FrancoPizza]

If it has to be an in house hire you go with Hop and it’s not even close. Hop has shown that he can win with talent and if there’s one thing he’s good for is upgrading the roster the minute he takes over here with his east coast connections. Maybe he’s only an average bench coach but talent helps to mask deficiencies. He’s also not wedded to the zone despite what some here fear. The only question is will John do what it takes to get him back here.

The other two are completely unproven and have disappointed on the recruiting trail. Not all their fault but you can’t heap praise on them either.

 

[kcsu]

So, you're afraid of risk, and don't recognize that risk also yields opportunity. You point out that there is no evidence to suggest that an outsider will have success, but can't bring yourself to face the reality that the same is true of the inside candidates.

And you can't articulate any qualifications for the incumbent three, beyond "continuity," but your gut tells you that they'll be adequate, even though the program is on extended period of decline, and change is needed.

Got it.

Read my post again.

 

[Dcuse]

How do you know all of that? We really don't know his knowledge of the game. Certainly not because he played the game. A lot of guys played the game and can't coach it. How do we know that players love to play for him? It certainly didn't help us keep kids last year. I'm sure he has a fiery desire to win. Just like almost everyone else. If you make decisions on what the fans want, sooner or later, you end up sitting with them.

Wow, did you make up that last sentence? You should patent that.
Tell you what, you and the rest of the group go ahead and continue to trash Gerry and educate us all on what a horrible coach he would be and I’ll just wait for it all to play out.

 

[RF2044]

That is all fine and dandy if we had 50 years of success. It is more like 40 years of success with 10 years of being a dying company. So why hire internally when the internal hires were not here during the successful era and were a big part of the decline? You conveniently keep ignoring that last 8 seasons. Do you think it is still 2014?\

Edit

Also you analogy doesn't hold water.

What we have is like a private company where the CEO father built the company, and it has declined in his old age. His three sons aren't really qualified to take over. His oldest son (Hop) at one time looked promising but when he was in charge while daddy was sick, the company took a downturn. When he went off to run a company on his own (Washington), he failed. So why bring that son back? His youngest son (GMac) has a celebrity public persona but only has a job because of daddy. He couldn't get hired by another company. The middle son (Red) at this point has the best resume but even daddy seems to prefer the other 2 sons. Middle son syndrome.

Now a public company with an aging CEO would not have his sons right underneath him. That nepotism wouldn't ever be allowed. The internal candidates would be there because they are the most qualified not because they are related to the CEO. That is not the case at SU. In any case the company has been in a downturn the last decade and the shareholders (fans) would not be happy hiring internally when an obvious change is needed.

Perfect summation.

 

[Cuse1055]

This has potential IMO. Melo has been coming off the bench a lot over the last several years. So he's got a lot more experience than other former Superstars being on the bench and watching the game unfold.

I have nothing to go off of on this, but I highly doubt Melo will want to go into coaching after his playing days are over. He seems like he will continue his business ventures and be involved in media of some sort.

 

[OrangeDW]

Knowledge of the game- check
Players who love to play for him- check
Fiery desire to win- check
Fan base that loves him save for a handful of dopes on syracusefan.com- CHECK!

All of that can be said about Autry too.

Why do you prefer GMac to Autry?

And leave the immature name calling, and “you guys hate Gerry” BS narratives out of your answer.

 

[kcsu]

Perfect summation.

Almost. Here is why.

Going outside vs inside is a 50 -50 roll of the dice. Why because its been proven overtime that simply bringing in an outsider regardless of their success is a crap shoot. Dino was very successful. He has one winning season out of 6.
Tom Crean again huge success. Terrible results at Georgia. The list of outsiders failing is as long if not longer than insiders failing.
So unless you are certain that the insider will fail you dont go out.
Why? Because it ensures that everything else outside of coaching that is good with the program doesn't get harmed.
Its a safe move. If it fails it will fail within 2-3 years and than you go for a drastic change. Bottom line is going outside has no more rate of success than promoting from within. So you reward loyalty and dont risk 50 years of success.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

All of that can be said about Autry too.

Why do you prefer GMac to Autry?

And leave the immature name calling, and “you guys hate Gerry” BS narratives out of your answer.

Those 1st three points are highly debatable.

When GMac played it wasn't like he was Rautins out there. Did anyone think GMac had a great BBall IQ when he played? Has our current team played with a higher IQ due to his coaching? Was he a great leader when he played?

Do they love playing for him? It isn't like we are a hard working, scrappy team out there. And why can't he recruit better if he is so loved?

Every HC is competitive.

Point 4 is not debatable. But being a good player doesn't mean good HC.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Almost. Here is why.

Going outside vs inside is a 50 -50 roll of the dice. Why because its been proven overtime that simply bringing in an outsider regardless of their success is a crap shoot. Dino was very successful. He has one winning season out of 6.
Tom Crean again huge success. Terrible results at Georgia. The list of outsiders failing is as long if not longer than insiders failing.
So unless you are certain that the insider will fail you dont go out.
Why? Because it ensures that everything else outside of coaching that is good with the program doesn't get harmed.
Its a safe move. If it fails it will fail within 2-3 years and than you go for a drastic change. Bottom line is going outside has no more rate of success than promoting from within. So you reward loyalty and dont risk 50 years of success.

Insiders in CBBall have failed more than outsiders. Either way the chances of failure are extremely high. You are looking at something like a 1/8 chance of success vs a 2/8 chance. They both suck as choices.

 

[Bayside44]

Those 1st three points are highly debatable.

When GMac played it wasn't like he was Rautins out there. Did anyone think GMac had a great BBall IQ when he played? Has our current team played with a higher IQ due to his coaching? Was he a great leader when he played?

Do they love playing for him? It isn't like we are a hard working, scrappy team out there. And why can't he recruit better if he is so loved?

Every HC is competitive.

Point 4 is not debatable. But being a good player doesn't mean good HC.

I'm not advocating that Gerry should be HC or comparing him to all time greats or anything, but he had a huge IQ and balls out there when he played. Dude played most of his time out of position, took a huge beating, lead the team to plenty of wins.

 

[dasher]

Wow, did you make up that last sentence? You should patent that.
Tell you what, you and the rest of the group go ahead and continue to trash Gerry and educate us all on what a horrible coach he would be and I’ll just wait for it all to play out.

LOL I didn't trash Gerry. I asked you how you know the things you claim to know about Gerry. And you couldn't do it so you had a tantrum. I want someone who has proved that they are a successful head coach to lead the program. Gerry hasn't proven that he can be a head coach. Certainly hasn't showed he is an outstanding recruiter, has he?

 

[miamicuse]

So go 50% inside 50% outside, hire a half insider. Rick Pitino!

 

[orange79]

Knowledge of the game- check
Players who love to play for him- check
Fiery desire to win- check
Fan base that loves him save for a handful of dopes on syracusefan.com- CHECK!

How does Red not check these boxes? And please try to be more specific than you were with the statement above.

Does Red not know the game?
Do players not like playing for Red?
Does Red not want to win?
Does the fan base hate Red?

Note that I just chose Red for my questions. Anyone could have been included.

 

[dasher]

How does Red not check these boxes? And please try to be more specific than you were with the statement above.

Does Red not know the game?
Do players not like playing for Red?
Does Red not want to win?
Does the fan base hate Red?

Note that I just chose Red for my questions. Anyone could have been included.

And he has more experience as a coach in the program. He is currently higher in the pecking order than Gerry

 

[OrangeXtreme]

So go 50% inside 50% outside, hire a half insider. Rick Pitino!

30 Second Rick was always 50% in / 50% out.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I'm not advocating that Gerry should be HC or comparing him to all time greats or anything, but he had a huge IQ and balls out there when he played. Dude played most of his time out of position, took a huge beating, lead the team to plenty of wins.

Not questioning his toughness. Nor am I saying he has no BBall IQ. I just don't think it was high. I don't remember him getting steals or assists because of his IQ, or making others around him better. Rautins IMO showed a higher IQ.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

And he has more experience as a coach in the program. He is currently higher in the pecking order than Gerry

Outside the program as well.

 

[RF2044]

Almost. Here is why.

Going outside vs inside is a 50 -50 roll of the dice. Why because its been proven overtime that simply bringing in an outsider regardless of their success is a crap shoot. Dino was very successful. He has one winning season out of 6.
Tom Crean again huge success. Terrible results at Georgia. The list of outsiders failing is as long if not longer than insiders failing.
So unless you are certain that the insider will fail you dont go out.
Why? Because it ensures that everything else outside of coaching that is good with the program doesn't get harmed.
Its a safe move. If it fails it will fail within 2-3 years and than you go for a drastic change. Bottom line is going outside has no more rate of success than promoting from within. So you reward loyalty and dont risk 50 years of success.

No, it isn't a 50/50 proposition. That's subjective BS that you're rationalizing. In actuality, most successors fail because the schools do not go through the process of identifying the best candidate. And those limited choices invariably result in failure. Are there exceptions? Sure. But going through the process of due diligence and prioritizing evaluative criteria that are actually pertinent to coaching beyond having former ties to the program does not make it a 50/50 proposition, it greatly enhances the chances of success..

 

[miamicuse]

30 Second Rick was always 50% in / 50% out.

That's perfect, we don't need another "long term" hire. I think all we need is 2-3 years of a transition as an on ramp back out of this mess. Rick can do wonders in 2 years and off into the sunset he goes.