Have you ever had success at a Big 6 school?

I'm a little surprised he survived that dip to D+ in prestige, but he's done a pretty good job since then.

building a C/C-/D+ school in a big 6 conf is hard, your basically taking a low major team and trying to progress against teams that generally have an avg team rating of 50-150 points more than you. So yes all the normal (baseline B-/B) Big 6 teams should be given a longer rope and maybe that rope is what we have right now of the "7 yrs no tourney = fired" but for the baseline B+ or better need to have actual standards PERIOD POINT BLANK.
so like nole asked if you haven't been there its tough to criticize.

Posted by noleaniml on 3/8/2016 8:02:00 AM (view original):
Have you ever had success at a Big 6 school?

I'm a little surprised he survived that dip to D+ in prestige, but he's done a pretty good job since then.

Since that D+ dip he has 2 NT bids and thats it. he is surviing on PI bids which are total **** that they keep you at a B/B- range. That's not a pretty good job it's still one of the worst big 6 records I've seen.

Unfortunately no, I'm still working my way there. I prefer not to take over ****** schools like Kansas State. And I haven't been playing long enough to just move up based on time..

It's also one of the worst Big 6 schools- so it corresponds.

Why don't you prefer to take over schools like Kansas State?

its 54/72nd big 6 schools, still shouldnt mean they shouldnt fire coaches, they should have a lower requirements, but we are looking at an all time worst resume.

because schools like kansas state are terrible. its the 2nd worst big job behind hawaii and taking it while you have a top 3 all time coach at kansas isn't worth it because noone in their right mind would stay there for a long time when in a few more seasons you can possibly get a much better job.

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/8/2016 3:03:00 PM (view original):
its 54/72nd big 6 schools, still shouldnt mean they shouldnt fire coaches, they should have a lower requirements, but we are looking at an all time worst resume.

because schools like kansas state are terrible. its the 2nd worst big job behind hawaii and taking it while you have a top 3 all time coach at kansas isn't worth it because noone in their right mind would stay there for a long time when in a few more seasons you can possibly get a much better job.

Exactly. Thank you for proving my point.

Posted by noleaniml on 3/8/2016 3:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by the0nlyis on 3/8/2016 3:03:00 PM (view original):
its 54/72nd big 6 schools, still shouldnt mean they shouldnt fire coaches, they should have a lower requirements, but we are looking at an all time worst resume.

because schools like kansas state are terrible. its the 2nd worst big job behind hawaii and taking it while you have a top 3 all time coach at kansas isn't worth it because noone in their right mind would stay there for a long time when in a few more seasons you can possibly get a much better job.

Exactly. Thank you for proving my point.

so because georgia is a bad school anyone should be able to coach it no matter what?

im down to have schools with requirements based on prestige, but no big 6 school should put up with that, not even hawaii

No, only coaches that earned their way there which is exactly the way it happens. Coaches at those school should be given a longer rope because it is such a challenge. Put up with what? Going to the NIT nearly every year? Have you ever looked at Georgia's results in the real world? Northwestern? Oregon State? Colorado? USF? Washington State? Rutgers? Penn State?

Posted by noleaniml on 3/8/2016 6:39:00 PM (view original):
No, only coaches that earned their way there which is exactly the way it happens. Coaches at those school should be given a longer rope because it is such a challenge. Put up with what? Going to the NIT nearly every year? Have you ever looked at Georgia's results in the real world? Northwestern? Oregon State? Colorado? USF? Washington State? Rutgers? Penn State?

In real life, Rutgers would have a prestige of D-

Georgia coaches don't coach that long with that **** a resume. Since 1975 there have been 3 total coaches at Georgia with a win% below .500 longest tenure was 6 seasons.

Northwestern ave Bill Carmondy a big break, but only 1 season under 10 wins unlike this Georgia team

Oregon State sucks and all their coaches seemed to have 4-6 seasons before they were gone, the longest since their best coach left was 6 seasons.

Colorado has 1 coach with a decent tenure other everyone was under 6. The 11 season coach had 2 NTbids and 4 PTs which prolonged him but still got him fired?

USF was big 6 for a little bit and before conf usa. 10 seasons was longest and they were really bad the first 3 seasons before a nice 3 seasons Greenburg makes no sense he wasn't good and actually left for VT?

no one has been at washington state longer than 5-7 seaosns for a long time.

again buttgers has no one with a long tenure there without success.

penn state has seemed to give the longest leash, probably unrelated, but I'd guess due to being a football school?

I don't think any of those schools prove a single point you are trying to make very few coaches lasted more than 7 seasons without something to show for it.

Posted by Benis on 3/8/2016 6:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by noleaniml on 3/8/2016 6:39:00 PM (view original):
No, only coaches that earned their way there which is exactly the way it happens. Coaches at those school should be given a longer rope because it is such a challenge. Put up with what? Going to the NIT nearly every year? Have you ever looked at Georgia's results in the real world? Northwestern? Oregon State? Colorado? USF? Washington State? Rutgers? Penn State?

In real life, Rutgers would have a prestige of D-

Buttgers would be lucky to have a D- baseline, I don't understand why conferences keep picking them up, they don't capitalize on their NYC market because they always suck no matter what.

It pains me to admit this Rutgers talk is kinda true. The Wetzel, Bannon, Walter era wasn't awful but that's about as good as I can remember. Bannon had the best shot, he signed Dantay Jones (who dunked on me when he was in Jr. High School) and they were poised to make some noise before the doors fell off (strip free throws, serving beer at bars, etc) and he got fired.

I feel like rutgers going to the big 10 was like when on here there is an opening in a super conference and the coaches post on the forums inviting someone to fill a vacancy.

"Come to our conference! We are awesome and have a great history with lots of great coaches! It's so much fun here!"

Then some new guy joins and proceeds to get DESTROYED every season until they quit in shame.

Posted by Trentonjoe on 3/8/2016 7:29:00 PM (view original):
It pains me to admit this Rutgers talk is kinda true. The Wetzel, Bannon, Walter era wasn't awful but that's about as good as I can remember. Bannon had the best shot, he signed Dantay Jones (who dunked on me when he was in Jr. High School) and they were poised to make some noise before the doors fell off (strip free throws, serving beer at bars, etc) and he got fired.

Dahntay Jones!

Of note, Tiquan Underwood juked the crap out of me at least once in HS. He was the Michael Vick of the conference his sr year.

Obviously you are entirely too interested in being obtuse about this- so this is likely pointless, but UGA consistently going to the NIT with an occasional trip to the NCAA would keep a coach there for a long time. I'm not sure why you care anyway- you have said that you don't want that difficult of a challenge- so why does it matter?