What I'm hearing

[RF2044]

I dont agree at all. The 50 years of excellence isnt going to be risked because the program had a few mediocre years. Red Mac or Hop will, as they should be given an opportunity.
If in the event they fail than JW will have a clean slate to move outside.
If however JW goes outside after Jim leaves and his outside choice fails he will have ruined 50 years of foundation and will be out as AD.

We don't agree because you're ascribing to an intellectually dishonest portrayal of JB's tenure.

It hasn't been 50 years of excellence. It's been 37 years of unparalleled above-average consistency with some intermittent excellence built in -- followed by a steep, 8 year decline in program performance culminating in last year's losing record.

The dropoff has been precipitous -- 74% winning percentage during the first 37 years, compared to 59% the last 8. This includes double-digit losses ALL of the last 8 seasons, with 7 of the 8 being 13+ losses. Over that 8 year span, we've been perpetually mired in middling .500 conference play, with two losing conference records mixed in.

If it had been 50 years of sustained excellence as you purport, then a continuity hire would make all the sense in the world, because there would be a reason to strive for continuity. Given the results of the last 8 years, continuity should be the very last thing we want.

We need to get back to the level of the 37 preceding years, not hope to keep our heads above water with 13, 14 loss seasons where we white-knuckle NCAA bids.

 

[kuethstheman]

We don't agree because you're ascribing to an intellectually dishonest portrayal of JB's tenure.

It hasn't been 50 years of excellence. It's been 37 years of unparalleled above-average consistency with some intermittent excellence built in -- followed by a steep, 8 year decline in program performance culminating in last year's losing record.

The dropoff has been precipitous -- 74% winning percentage during the first 37 years, compared to 59% the last 8. This includes double-digit losses ALL of the last 8 seasons, with 7 of the 8 being 13+ losses. Over that 8 year span, we've been perpetually mired in middling .500 conference play, with two losing conference records mixed in.

If it had been 50 years of sustained excellence as you purport, then a continuity hire would make all the sense in the world, because there would be a reason to strive for continuity. Given the results of the last 8 years, continuity should be the very last thing we want.

We need to get back to the level of the 37 preceding years, not hope to keep our heads above water with 13, 14 loss seasons where we white-knuckle NCAA bids.

It's hard to argue that a continuity hire is the best course. On the other hand, if you believed what's in most of the post-mortem threads over the last few years, our main problems are JB's stubbornness and lack of effort. If that's right, someone already on the bench might just be able to bring us back.

 

[KaiserUEO]

theres really only one choice to get Syracuse hoop back on the national map after JB retires...

and thats a fresh, somewhat clean start.

get rid of everyone.

 

[dasher]

Those two individuals - Autry & McNamara - have not received a sniff of a Power 5 head coaching job. Why do you think that is? One would guess or opine that it's because they aren't the best candidates for those types of positions.

Following that logic, this would be a HUGE opportunity for them.

If I were to get a job that I'm not necessarily qualified for but I was promoted for internally for a number of reasons -- continuity, manager was the issue, etc. -- why would I give them the same leeway as an external candidate that I chose out of a qualified pool of candidates?

Makes no sense to do it any other way.

I would guess that you have never been hired in that situation. I have been. I have no problem with not hiring them. But if they do get hired, they have to get a fair chance to succeed. In your world, if JB leaves the table bare, hey guys, you have two years to get this turned around. Quite frankly, that is ridiculous.

 

[dasher]

I dunno how it applies to hoops, but - it seems the general rule of thumb for new coaching hires for football is:

• continuity hire - 3-4 years to show they can maintain/build on what was there prior
• new hire 4-5 years, since they need to get 'their guys' and 'their program' installed.

Naturally, plenty of schools have punted on coaches long before the 'minimum' years, for whatever reason(s), but Cuse isn't flush with $, and can't afford to flip thru coaches capriciously.

And if the hire turns out to be Kevin Stallings like, two years and out is fine. But that isn't what we are talking about here. It's crazy to hire a guy, any guy, and say you get two years to turn this ship around.

 

[Madbiker]

We've done a great job identifying kids early on in the process but have not done a good job closing the deal. Once the succession plan is known it should make a huge difference. And yes, people (some fans of ours and other programs) have always taken JAB for granted.

In younger JB days he made a living bringing in a lot of recruits ranked in the national top 40-60 kids. Real good players. Many under rated. Then an occasional top 20 special kid. But that has been declining for quite a while now. We are lucky to get kids now 80-100. Several outside the top 100. Various reasons. But fire in the belly to get out on the road and be a factor has been a big reason and depending too much on assistants to do the heavy lifting. The new HC, whoever it is, has to change this.

 

[44cuse]

In younger JB days he made a living bringing in a lot of recruits ranked in the national top 40-60 kids. Real good players. Many under rated. Then an occasional top 20 special kid. But that has been declining for quite a while now. We are lucky to get kids now 80-100. Several outside the top 100. Various reasons. But fire in the belly to get out on the road and be a factor has been a big reason and depending too much on assistants to do the heavy lifting. The new HC, whoever it is, has to change this.

Hop was a bandaid there for a good while as well.

44cuse

 

[RealMcNeil]

And if the hire turns out to be Kevin Stallings like, two years and out is fine. But that isn't what we are talking about here. It's crazy to hire a guy, any guy, and say you get two years to turn this ship around.

I would guess that you have never been hired in that situation. I have been. I have no problem with not hiring them. But if they do get hired, they have to get a fair chance to succeed. In your world, if JB leaves the table bare, hey guys, you have two years to get this turned around. Quite frankly, that is ridiculous.

Agree and disagree - timeline doesn't matter, vision and achievement matters. Any coach needs to be held accountable to certain measures of success that align to the vision of the program every year - it won't always be a binary outcome, but progress matters. As an example, if your vision is a new defensive identity with 100% man defense to better manage the opponent effective possession ratio, then you better be making defensible progress on defensive rebounding and/or forced turnover percentages even if that's just signing recruits that rebound and force turnovers.

 

[pfister1]

I think if you can only guarantee Red (or whomever) two years, it will be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It weaponizes opposing coaches to recruit against us.
It cuts their legs off from day 1 to roadmap getting us out of JB's gravitational force.
And, to me, it showcases weakness in JW's ability to do his job.

I want a national search. If that isn't happening, so be it. But don't hedge so much that it over-democratizes the decision making process to the detriment of the final result. We need a benevolent dictator now.

These decisions are hard. That's why not a ton of people have this job. If it's Red. Great. Love Red since his Scholastic Sports America on ESPN when he was in HS. But give the man every opportunity to succeed.

How would opposing coaches know what their guaranteed tenure is? They don’t have to publicize the terms of the contract.

 

[pfister1]

We don't agree because you're ascribing to an intellectually dishonest portrayal of JB's tenure.

It hasn't been 50 years of excellence. It's been 37 years of unparalleled above-average consistency with some intermittent excellence built in -- followed by a steep, 8 year decline in program performance culminating in last year's losing record.

The dropoff has been precipitous -- 74% winning percentage during the first 37 years, compared to 59% the last 8. This includes double-digit losses ALL of the last 8 seasons, with 7 of the 8 being 13+ losses. Over that 8 year span, we've been perpetually mired in middling .500 conference play, with two losing conference records mixed in.

If it had been 50 years of sustained excellence as you purport, then a continuity hire would make all the sense in the world, because there would be a reason to strive for continuity. Given the results of the last 8 years, continuity should be the very last thing we want.

We need to get back to the level of the 37 preceding years, not hope to keep our heads above water with 13, 14 loss seasons where we white-knuckle NCAA bids.

Totally ignores the fact that the NCAA has adopted lots of rules to level the playing field over that time and we’ve stepped up the competitive level of our schedule, both out of conference and in conference from the beginning of JBs tenure to today. At the beginning we were a heavy weight fighting little kids most nights now we’re a heavy weight fighting other same class fighters most nights.

 

[MikeSU02]

How would opposing coaches know what their guaranteed tenure is? They don’t have to publicize the terms of the contract.

I would assume the contract length, salary and buyout terms will be found out, one way or another.

I think there could easily be some assumptions based on that information.

 

[pfister1]

I would assume the contract length, salary and buyout terms will be found out, one way or another.

I think there could easily be some assumptions based on that information.

Put a confidentiality clause in the contract and the only way those terms are found out is if one of the parties breaches the contract. Syracuse isn’t a public institution, it doesn’t have to publish the terms. It’s not that hard.

 

[RF2044]

Totally ignores the fact that the NCAA has adopted lots of rules to level the playing field over that time and we’ve stepped up the competitive level of our schedule, both out of conference and in conference from the beginning of JBs tenure to today. At the beginning we were a heavy weight fighting little kids most nights now we’re a heavy weight fighting other same class fighters most nights.

I don't buy that -- seems like rationalization [with all due respect, pfister -- you and I are generally on the same page more than we aren't]. I see it as only being a minor influence, at most. We're not talking about dropping an extra game or two -- we're talking about losing nearly twice as many games throughout the season as we used to.

There are plenty of teams that play challenging preseason / out of conference portions to their schedule, and still thrive. Good teams can still win games despite a challenging schedule. We used to win seemingly every preseason tournament we played in, because we had good teams. Didn't matter who we squared off against. That hasn't been the case since 2017, when suddenly we seemed overmatched. And that's continued as a declining trend to the present day, culminating with last year's debacle -- when we got rolled by a bunch of middle of the road teams in addition to the good teams we played.

We don't win as many games out of conference OR in conference because our rosters haven't been as good for nearly a decade as they used to be, which has relegated us to being middle of the pack in conference, as well. That's why we're losing more games.

Hell, when the Big East was loaded in the early 2000s, we played a lot tougher in conference and despite that were never on the bubble. Want to know why? Because we had better players and better teams.

Last year's ACC conference was one of the worst -- collectively -- in more than 20 years. And yet we still had a losing conference record. The conference schedule isn't tougher, we're just not as good as we used to be. And consequently, lose a lot more games to teams that used to not be our peers, but currently are due to our program's tangible decline.

 

[Cuse181]

What were Copeland and Taylor ranked? How many top 50 guys has he recruited in 10 years? Top 100 guys? Until Copeland and Taylor do something they’re nothing.

I’m not saying they’re going to be bad but Gmac has gotten the benefit of doubt every single time, if his name was John Smith and didn’t have his history as a player here he would’ve been out on his ass years ago.

#1 ranked guys are nothing until they perform on the court.

 

[pfister1]

I don't buy that -- seems like rationalization [with all due respect, pfister -- you and I are generally on the same page more than we aren't]. I see it as only being a minor influence, at most. We're not talking about dropping an extra game or two -- we're talking about losing nearly twice as many games throughout the season as we used to.

There are plenty of teams that play challenging preseason / out of conference portions to their schedule, and still thrive. Good teams can still win games despite a challenging schedule. We used to win seemingly every preseason tournament we played in, because we had good teams. Didn't matter who we squared off against. That hasn't been the case since 2017, when suddenly we seemed overmatched. And that's continued as a declining trend to the present day, culminating with last year's debacle -- when we got rolled by a bunch of middle of the road teams in addition to the good teams we played.

We don't win as many games out of conference OR in conference because our rosters haven't been as good for nearly a decade as they used to be, which has relegated us to being middle of the pack in conference, as well. That's why we're losing more games.

Hell, when the Big East was loaded in the early 2000s, we played a lot tougher in conference and despite that were never on the bubble. Want to know why? Because we had better players and better teams.

Last year's ACC conference was one of the worst -- collectively -- in more than 20 years. And yet we still had a losing conference record. The conference schedule isn't tougher, we're just not as good as we used to be. And consequently, lose a lot more games to teams that used to not be our peers, but currently are due to our program's tangible decline.

My point was that the two things have conspired together against us. NCAA rule changes that are intended to level the playing field AND a step up in the level of our competition when all games on the schedule are looked at together.

 

[RF2044]

My point was that the two things have conspired together against us. NCAA rule changes that are intended to level the playing field AND a step up in the level of our competition when all games on the schedule are looked at together.

I understand the point you're trying to make, but on a prioritized list of reasons for the decline in Syracuse basketball, those two things would be pretty far down the list in my opinion, not causal.

 

[kcsu]

No one is going to dispute that the last eight regular seasons have been well below Syracuse standards. (Going back 10 brings in the 30 win Final Four team in 2012-13 and the 28-6 team from the following year.) But I still cringe a bit when we are calling a string of the last 10 NCAA Tournaments where we have been to 2 Final Fours, an Elite Eight and 2 other Sweet 16s a decade of mediocrity.

That being said, I think we are overdue for a transition mostly because JB's age has certainly become a detriment in recruiting. And I am fine with keeping the transition within the family. Keeping in mind that we have invested heavily in football over the last year, I honestly don't see a splashy outside hire for an established winning coach to be in the cards. And taking a shot on the latest hot, mid major young coach is a crapshoot that may not be a long term solution anyway.

We were spoiled by a half century of one of the greatest college basketball coaches of all time heading the program. We are never going to see that again.

The best chance at continued success is to hire from within.
Danforth to JB worked well. Im betting that Red Mac or Hop will do as well if not better than an outsider.

 

[MikeSU02]

Put a confidentiality clause in the contract and the only way those terms are found out is if one of the parties breaches the contract. Syracuse isn’t a public institution, it doesn’t have to publish the terms. It’s not that hard.

The good thing is we'll see how this plays out. I get what you're saying, and you absolutely may be right, I just don't agree that it won't get out. Fingers crossed it will not.

 

[OrangeDW]

No one is going to dispute that the last eight regular seasons have been well below Syracuse standards. (Going back 10 brings in the 30 win Final Four team in 2012-13 and the 28-6 team from the following year.) But I still cringe a bit when we are calling a string of the last 10 NCAA Tournaments where we have been to 2 Final Fours, an Elite Eight and 2 other Sweet 16s a decade of mediocrity.

That being said, I think we are overdue for a transition mostly because JB's age has certainly become a detriment in recruiting. And I am fine with keeping the transition within the family. Keeping in mind that we have invested heavily in football over the last year, I honestly don't see a splashy outside hire for an established winning coach to be in the cards. And taking a shot on the latest hot, mid major young coach is a crapshoot that may not be a long term solution anyway.

We were spoiled by a half century of one of the greatest college basketball coaches of all time heading the program. We are never going to see that again.

Weve been a mediocre overall team that is dangerous in the tournament. Late career Chaney Temple. Never in the top 25, but competitive and capable of winning some games in the tourney with a coach who knows how to pull them out, but lacking the high end talent to do more than that.

 

[Consigliere]

Weve been a mediocre overall team that is dangerous in the tournament. Late career Chaney Temple. Never in the top 25, but competitive and capable of winning some games in the tourney with a coach who knows how to pull them out, but lacking the high end talent to do more than that.

Guess it depends on your definition of mediocre. I opt for the more literal definition and content that while we are no longer elite, we are far from mediocre in terms of Division I college basketball

 

[721Comstock]

Guess it depends on your definition of mediocre. I opt for the more literal definition and content that while we are no longer elite, we are far from mediocre in terms of Division I college basketball

We were a game below .500 last year.

Losing conference record.

That is literally the definition of mediocre.

 

[CuseFaninVT]

Weve been a mediocre overall team that is dangerous in the tournament. Late career Chaney Temple. Never in the top 25, but competitive and capable of winning some games in the tourney with a coach who knows how to pull them out, but lacking the high end talent to do more than that.

When’s the last time a Syracuse team felt like a national championship contender? Feels like it’s been a long time. That should be the standard.

 

[OrangeDW]

When’s the last time a Syracuse team felt like a national championship contender? Feels like it’s been a long time. That should be the standard.

Probably the CJ Fair charge at Cameron game.

 

[RF2044]

Probably the CJ Fair charge at Cameron game.

There's no question, that specific game was an inflection point in our programs trajectory.

In the sense that there were is a qualitative difference in what came before, and what the program's outcomes have been since that game.

 

[pfister1]

Weve been a mediocre overall team that is dangerous in the tournament. Late career Chaney Temple. Never in the top 25, but competitive and capable of winning some games in the tourney with a coach who knows how to pull them out, but lacking the high end talent to do more than that.

Late career Chaney had better talent than JB has had the last few years. Chaney coached through the 2005-06 season and had Mardy Collins drafted in the 1st Round in 2006 and Mark Karcher drafted in the 2nd round in 2000 and he was coaching all that time in one of the east coast basketball talent hot beds, Philadelphia, where he should have had pretty easy access to players (ability to build relationships with local high school coaches, get in front of them and their players and attend all of their games without having to travel if he wanted to).

Now we're playing in a conference based in the South where we don't get the same NE regional exposure as we used to. Also used to be that Big East hoops dominated the television scene in the NE where the best high school hoops talent was concentrated.