What I'm hearing

[jgeorge322]

Finance the players?

Yea, how you are going to pay then to get them to go to your school…

 

[pfister1]

No idea. Haven't given it a thought since it isn't my job to make that hire. I just know that it makes sense to have a real search. Keep in mind, that in a former life, the large financial institution that I worked for, hired me rather than go outside for the director of financial sales. They could have gone outside and didn't. But if I was in the position of picking the next coach, I wouldn't confuse where we are, with where Duke or North Carolina are.

Not many are confusing Syracuse during basketball season with Durham or Chapel Hill and if they do you might want to give them a snow blower as a gift at their welcome to the Hill party.

But on the good side that weather keeps many Syracusans inside during hoops season and drives the fans to the Dome to support their team. We’ve had 90 games played in our home arena with crowds in excess of 30k, how many have those Heels or Devils had?

 

[dasher]

Not many are confusing Syracuse during basketball season with Durham or Chapel Hill and if they do you might want to give them a snow blower as a gift at their welcome to the Hill party.

But on the good side that weather keeps many Syracusans inside during hoops season and drives the fans to the Dome to support their team. We’ve had 90 games played in our home arena with crowds in excess of 30k, how many have those Heels or Devils had?

Why in the world are you asking me this?

 

[pfister1]

Why in the world are you asking me this?

Because you sound like you can’t see anything that might make SU an attractive landing spot for a top head coach.

 

[dollarbill44]

Yeah, I'd rather have Hop instead of Red or GMac. Ace recruiter and he's had a chance to be a head coach and learn from his mistakes. There's a long list of Greats who did not succeed at first. Seems unlikely though.

Is it really a long list, though? I am genuinely interested in the list of college basketball "greats" who had a losing record at their first job. I suspect it really isn't a long list, especially in the last 50 years.
I bet it's a longer list of coaches who struggled at their first job that struggled at their future jobs, too.
I love Hop, but if he wasn't an SU guy, would anyone really be clamoring for him based on his track record at UW or an as- yet unproven ability to learn from his mistakes?

 

[cliftonparksufan]

Not many are confusing Syracuse during basketball season with Durham or Chapel Hill and if they do you might want to give them a snow blower as a gift at their welcome to the Hill party.

But on the good side that weather keeps many Syracusans inside during hoops season and drives the fans to the Dome to support their team. We’ve had 90 games played in our home arena with crowds in excess of 30k, how many have those Heels or Devils had?

We all know the answer is zero. Cuse is a top ten job as long as it pays like a top ten job. If ADJW doesn't interview anyone outside the current staff plus Hop then he is doing the university a great disservice. If he does and Red is still the best candidate, then great, we've got ourselves an awesome coach. But, you only know you have the best hire when you know you've interviewed the best candidates.

 

[pfister1]

We all know the answer is zero. Cuse is a top ten job as long as it pays like a top ten job. If ADJW doesn't interview anyone outside the current staff plus Hop then he is doing the university a great disservice. If he does and Red is still the best candidate, then great, we've got ourselves an awesome coach. But, you only know you have the best hire when you know you've interviewed the best candidates.

There is no way you interview all interested candidates and pick a guy with no head coaching experience as the “best hire”. You are either seeking the best candidate (in which case it wouldn’t be someone with Zero head coaching experience/resume) or you are willing to invest some time in developing someone you believe has potential to be a successful head coach. I believe those to be two different paths, not saying I know which will prove to have been a good or bad path, just that they are different paths.

And they’ve had long “interviews” of the in-house guys. They should know them well enough that a decision on them isn’t being made on an interview.

 

[cliftonparksufan]

There is no way you interview all interested candidates and pick a guy with no head coaching experience as the “best hire”. You are either seeking the best candidate (in which case it wouldn’t be someone with Zero head coaching experience/resume) or you are willing to invest some time in developing someone you believe has potential to be a successful head coach. I believe those to be two different paths, not saying I know which will prove to have been a good or bad path, just that they are different paths.

And they’ve had long “interviews” of the in-house guys. They should know them well enough that a decision on them isn’t being made on an interview.

Right. So let's say ADJW has already decided that he thinks that Red will make a great HC. Doesn't he owe it to the school to at least "open" the process to see what other interested candidates are out there.

Let's say every strong finalist has 8 great plusses and one big negative. Even Nate Oats and Rick Pitino aren't perfect and it's easy to find something negative about them and it would have to do with their personality and/or fondness for Italian food. Red has a lot of great traits but his negative would be lack of HC experience.

I think looking at guys like Shaheen Holloway and Hubert Davis and how they used their personalities and leadership traits to develop winners could bold well for Red. It's not easy replacing JAB but it will be real interesting to see the process develop. I just hope the pool is wide open.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Even sticking with the subjectively flawed premise of “50 year foundation of excellence,” whether you favor an internal vs external hire seems to involve your commitment to zone as a major component. If you’re fine with zone continuing and solidifying as the Syracuse “identity,“ sure, continuity makes sense. If not, internal makes very little sense.

The other matter is that you’ve ascribed some sort of value to our incumbents, yet they haven’t proven anything. I assume you’re assuming it’s because they have ostensibly been contributors at some level toward the “50 year foundation of excellence,” but we don’t know what that level is.

Great point. And I will add that if we choose the internal hire, let's remember that this crew of coaches have presided over the worst period of SU basketball in 60+ years, and our recruiting under this group has fallen off a cliff.

So, when we talk about promoting from within, it's not like these assistants have been anywhere near our best.

 

[CousCuse]

Is it really a long list, though? I am genuinely interested in the list of college basketball "greats" who had a losing record at their first job. I suspect it really isn't a long list, especially in the last 50 years.
I bet it's a longer list of coaches who struggled at their first job that struggled at their future jobs, too.
I love Hop, but if he wasn't an SU guy, would anyone really be clamoring for him based on his track record at UW or an as- yet unproven ability to learn from his mistakes?

There is a different set of abilities that are needed to be successful as a CEO and a vice president. The only time a person can actually develop those abilities is when they are in that position, except in rare instances where the individual is a natural. A person who has only been an assistant coach is going to be learning on the job.

 

[dasher]

Because you sound like you can’t see anything that might make SU an attractive landing spot for a top head coach.

Please cite where I have said any such thing. Please send where a thoughtful person could say I said or hinted any such thing. You can't because I didn't. Your take on me saying any such thing is a ridiculous take. I think Syracuse is a great job. It is not North Carolina or Duke. Or Kentucky. But still a great job. Not to mention that I have argued just the opposite on this board to what you are claiming. As long as we pay at a rate that is competitive with any other top tier program, we can get a top level coach. Getting someone to leave another top tier program is a different story for a number of reasons however.

 

[pfister1]

Please cite where I have said any such thing. Please send where a thoughtful person could say I said or hinted any such thing. You can't because I didn't. Your take on me saying any such thing is a ridiculous take. I think Syracuse is a great job. It is not North Carolina or Duke. Or Kentucky. But still a great job. Not to mention that I have argued just the opposite on this board to what you are claiming. As long as we pay at a rate that is competitive with any other top tier program, we can get a top level coach. Getting someone to leave another top tier program is a different story for a number of reasons however.

My point is that Syracuse has attributes that those programs may not. Historical on court achievements is one positive attribute, but not the only consideration. SU’s situation gives it attributes those programs may not be able to match and make it attractive for those reasons.

1. The Dome and the ability to play before enormous crowds and how that may appeal to young recruits.

2. The Newhouse School and the number of big name national broadcasters with SU ties means that achievements on the Hill rarely go unnoticed or get lost in the shuffle.

3. A history of being dedicated to a long and lasting relationship with its head coach.

4. Being located in a mid-market from a day to day perspective but with pretty good ties to the largest market in the US (NYC).

 

[dasher]

My point is that Syracuse has attributes that those programs may not. Historical on court achievements is one positive attribute, but not overwhelming. SU’s situation gives it attributes those programs may not be able to match and make it attractive for those reasons.

1. The Dome and the ability to play before enormous crowds and how that may appeal to young recruits.

2. The Newhouse School and the number of big name national broadcasters with SU ties means that achievements on the Hill rarely go unnoticed or get lost in the shuffle.

3. A history of being dedicated to a long and lasting relationship with its head coach.

4. Being located in a mid-market from a day to day perspective but with pretty good ties to the largest market in the US (NYC).

Once again, why say this to me? I know all of those things. I think Syracuse is a great job. Is it the best job in the country? No. But a top level job, for sure. Yet you write to me like I think it is Providence.

 

[pfister1]

Once again, why say this to me? I know all of those things. I think Syracuse is a great job. Is it the best job in the country? No. But a top level job, for sure. Yet you write to me like I think it is Providence.

Because while you are literally correct that it is not UNC, Duke or Kentucky as YOU said. I am trying to make the point that it has advantages that UNC, Duke and Kentucky do not.

 

[Fly Rodder]

 

[Bayside44]

The seating difference b/t us and UNC is going to be irrelevant in a couple of years.

And we aren't competing against those guys for coaches.

Not sure in the 30 plus (!?!) years I've been paying attention we've had many high profile athletes in Newhouse. Paulus is the last off hand.

 

[maxxyz]

Because while you are literally correct that it is not UNC, Duke or Kentucky as YOU said. I am trying to make the point that it has advantages that UNC, Duke and Kentucky do not.

I think SU is a great job for a basketball coach, but I'm not sure that any of the four points you listed are in the top five items that sway a high level coach to accept a job.Limited oversite

"The Dome and the ability to play before enormous crowds and how that may appeal to young recruits. UNC, Duke, Kentucky have tremendous game day environments." The dome may have more seats to fill, but any of these schools have great atmosphere and traditions.

"The Newhouse School and the number of big name national broadcasters with SU ties means that achievements on the Hill rarely go unnoticed or get lost in the shuffle." I respectfully say that, while possibly true, this isn't high on a candidates list.

"A history of being dedicated to a long and lasting relationship with its head coach." And UNC, Duke and Kentucky haven't been dedicated to their long lasting coaches? A top candidate thinks they're going to succeed, just like a top recruit. This isn't on their radar. They want to have unfettered control of the program.

"Being located in a mid-market from a day to day perspective but with pretty good ties to the largest market in the US (NYC)." Possibly true, but not so much in the last ten years.


I believe that, for a proven successful coaching candidate, it comes down to -

1. Compensation
2. Compensation
3. Compensation
4. NIL opportunities for recruits
5. Recruiting markets
6. University's commitment to current & new facilities
7. University AD
8. Position of basketball in the athletic department hierarchy
9. Full or nearly full control over the program.

I'm sure I forgot something, but your four above are below the above list. My worst fear in our coaching search is someone like Nate Oats using SU to get an upgraded contract at Alabama. That would be super embarassing.

 

[RF2044]

I think SU is a great job for a basketball coach, but I'm not sure that any of the four points you listed are in the top five items that sway a high level coach to accept a job.Limited oversite

"The Dome and the ability to play before enormous crowds and how that may appeal to young recruits. UNC, Duke, Kentucky have tremendous game day environments." The dome may have more seats to fill, but any of these schools have great atmosphere and traditions.

"The Newhouse School and the number of big name national broadcasters with SU ties means that achievements on the Hill rarely go unnoticed or get lost in the shuffle." I respectfully say that, while possibly true, this isn't high on a candidates list.

"A history of being dedicated to a long and lasting relationship with its head coach." And UNC, Duke and Kentucky haven't been dedicated to their long lasting coaches? A top candidate thinks they're going to succeed, just like a top recruit. This isn't on their radar.

"Being located in a mid-market from a day to day perspective but with pretty good ties to the largest market in the US (NYC)." Possibly true, but not so much in the last ten years.


I believe that, for a proven successful coaching candidate, it comes down to -

1. Compensation
2. Compensation
3. Compensation
4. NIL opportunities for recruits
5. Recruiting markets
6. University's commitment to current & new facilities
7. University AD
8. Position of basketball in the athletic department hierarchy
9. Full or nearly full control over the program.

I'm sure I forgot something, but your four above are below the above list. My worst fear in our coaching search is someone like Nate Oats using SU to get an upgraded contract at Alabama. That would be super embarassing.

I wonder if #4 should actually shift up to #1 -- because that seems to be the "new normal" differentiator between the haves and the have nots.

Example -- Tennessee buying and selling recruits, leveraging their NIL capabilities.

I have to believe that the compensation will be there, and in line with what we need to pay. So I just don't see that as being as big of a key factor.

 

[Bayside44]

I wonder if #4 should actually shift up to #1 -- because that seems to be the "new normal" differentiator between the haves and the have nots.

Example -- Tennessee buying and selling recruits, leveraging their NIL capabilities.

I have to believe that the compensation will be there, and in line with what we need to pay. So I just don't see that as being as big of a key factor.

All our coaches are obsessed with NIL. After hearing that that could be #1.

 

[maxxyz]

I wonder if #4 should actually shift up to #1 -- because that seems to be the "new normal" differentiator between the haves and the have nots.

Example -- Tennessee buying and selling recruits, leveraging their NIL capabilities.

I have to believe that the compensation will be there, and in line with what we need to pay. So I just don't see that as being as big of a key factor.

Good point on the NIL.

I'd like to think SU will pay well, but JB has been paid less than his peers. Will SU offer 4M-5M per year? Otherwise its mid-major or Mike Hopkins or Red.

 

[RF2044]

Good point on the NIL.

I'd like to think SU will pay well, but JB has been paid less than his peers. Will SU offer 4M-5M per year? Otherwise its mid-major or Mike Hopkins or Red.

I hear you, but JB "offered" a home town discount. This is a guy who got paid a lot, even in the 70s. He wasn't a flashy dresser -- he preferred wearing sweats and the SU swag that the University gave him for free. He was perfectly content to drive Pontiacs [as opposed to more expensive cars]. He lives in a town that didn't have a high cost of living, relatively speaking. And then he got Nike sponsorship early on, and probably made close to 7 figures from that on top of his coaching salary.

And after a few years, he had more money that he knew what to do with.

Because of that, JB never seemed to care about maximizing his earning potential. Maslow's hierarchy of needs -- he had more money than he knew what to do with, and he didn't live an exorbitant lifestyle, so making "more" money never seemed to be his top priority.

No doubt, SU has benefitted from that. BUT that doesn't mean that they CAN'T or WON'T pay. They're going to have to, or the alternative is a subpar candidate, like you state.

 

[cliftonparksufan]

"Being located in a mid-market from a day to day perspective but with pretty good ties to the largest market in the US (NYC)." Possibly true, but not so much in the last ten years.

Not a coincidence that we've played nine seasons in the ACC. Once we left the Big East Tournament, we lost a lot of our New York City swagger.

 

[capeorange]

There's a long list of Greats who did not succeed at first. Seems unlikely though.

This sounds like the same argument that was used in the early days of grob.

 

[pfister1]

Thought the whole point of the conversation was establishing why we could be competitive offering candidates roughly competitive economic terms, but that there are also non-cash benefits in coaching at SU that aren’t available, or at a minimum are different, at other schools and what SU offers in those regards may be more appealing to particular individuals.

 

[Dinkyspond]

You can only do so much at Providence. I think Ed would leave for Syracuse in a second. As for Nate I think you got to make a run at him. I don't see him staying at Alabama for life.

I don’t think he's leaving Providence. He's from there and so is his wife, she's a well-known and popular police officer with the Providence PD. They're part of the fabric of that city, just not seeing him walk away from that.