DI Coaching Carousel - Page 12 - Hoops Dynasty

Posts: 2072 (0)

Hall of Famer

92

Pro

Posted by girt25 on 4/12/2011 11:05:00 PM (view original):
Is it just me, or are some of these successful mid-majors coaches smartening up ... and instead of taking mediocre BCS jobs that are very difficult to succeed at, they're using the outside interest to leverage better contracts (albeit not what the BCS could offer)?

They see the cautionary tales of the Lickliters, Monsons, etc. and think, "Hmmm ... making a million bucks at a place like this might beat the hell out of making $1.8 mil at a place like NC State".

i agree. what is butler's coach making now, isn't it over 2M? its terrible i keep forgetting his name, i mean the guy was as close to winning a title as you can get and then had another shot... grrrr. i would recognize it in an instant, but i refuse to look it up, this is going to bother me all night..... =(

anyway, i think it is smart of these guys - if you are at a school willing to invest in the program, and you are in a position where you are able to bring in the talent to have a good shot at the NT every year, why not wait until you get a quality big 6 job? it seems to make a heck of a lot of sense. i think its way easier to win at a middle of the road big 6 job than the bottom of the barrel, and honestly don't think its *that* much harder of a job to get (except for maybe the worst big 6 programs who are currently in a major rut, too).

4/12/2011 11:24 PM

coach_billyg

Posts: 2072 (0)

Hall of Famer

92

Pro

the one thing i would worry about for a guy like butlers coach is, if he wants to coach an elite, it seems like he is going to have to kick it in the big 6 for a while first. i would think the elite programs would be hesitant to hire a guy who has never had to work in the high intensity environment of coaching in a major conference. i mean, i guess at some point, the guy is just too good to pass on. but im not sure he is there yet.

4/12/2011 11:28 PM

gators55

Posts: 57 (0)

Hall of Famer

152 16 33

Prospect

Billy Donovan just keeps reloading staff wise. What a great group of guys we've got here now. Exciting times.

4/12/2011 11:30 PM

jkline

Posts: 195 (0)

Rookie

9

Prospect

Posted by coach_billyg on 4/12/2011 11:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by girt25 on 4/12/2011 11:05:00 PM (view original):
Is it just me, or are some of these successful mid-majors coaches smartening up ... and instead of taking mediocre BCS jobs that are very difficult to succeed at, they're using the outside interest to leverage better contracts (albeit not what the BCS could offer)?

They see the cautionary tales of the Lickliters, Monsons, etc. and think, "Hmmm ... making a million bucks at a place like this might beat the hell out of making $1.8 mil at a place like NC State".
i agree. what is butler's coach making now, isn't it over 2M? its terrible i keep forgetting his name, i mean the guy was as close to winning a title as you can get and then had another shot... grrrr. i would recognize it in an instant, but i refuse to look it up, this is going to bother me all night..... =(

anyway, i think it is smart of these guys - if you are at a school willing to invest in the program, and you are in a position where you are able to bring in the talent to have a good shot at the NT every year, why not wait until you get a quality big 6 job? it seems to make a heck of a lot of sense. i think its way easier to win at a middle of the road big 6 job than the bottom of the barrel, and honestly don't think its *that* much harder of a job to get (except for maybe the worst big 6 programs who are currently in a major rut, too).

Stevens is a great coach, but the school itself doesn't get enough credit. Butler wasn't built in a day. The emergence of that program began with Bary Collier. Plus, Butler has a tradition that is unique. There is only one Hinkle fieldhouse. Indianapolis is good location if you want to catch players who slip the cracks of Purdue and Indiana. If you look at Gonzaga, you realize that Spokane has a lot to do with the success of that program. It's not just because of Mark Few that they are successful. I think both Stevens and Few realize that and they both have the examples of predecessors who left and failed and probably regret leaving in hindsight. Jim Larrannaga also turned down the Big East after George Mason's run to the Final Four in 2006. I think that what has changed is that it used to be that coaches were absolutely convinced that you could not get to the Final Four or ever have any realistic chance to win a championship at a mid major. But, that is no longer evident and not only is it demonstrated that you can get there, but you can also have a consistently successful program that is as good or better than 80% of the BCS conference schools. That is also a new perception, as it used to be the notion that only the occasional senior-heavy mid major team could compete at the same level as a decent BCS team. Coaches have gotten smarter and a lot of that can be linked to the philosophy that Dick Bennet developed at UM-Milwaukee in the 1990s. As the values of of college players have eroded at big-time programs, a values-based approach has become even more effective. In an era when the majority of highly-talented coaches and players are constantly looking for their next move and are not totally committed to their present situation, the ones who are committed and stable tend to stand out. It's a perfect time for a program like Butler to capitlize.

4/13/2011 12:22 AM (edited)

jkline

Posts: 195 (0)

Rookie

9

Prospect

There will always be a money incentive for a coach to move up to the BCS and some will want a bigger stage, a chance for greater glory. But, the other thing that persists and makes coaches want to get out of mid majors is scheduling. BCS schools generally avoid going on the road to play at mid majors. You won't see Kansas accepting invitations to play at Wichita State, for example, but Kansas will let WSU come play at Allen. If there was equity in scheduling, then things would change even more radically than they have. Butler is pretty unique in that, because of their connections with Thad Matta, Ohio State and Xavier will actually go play at Hinkle. That's extremely rare for big time programs to do that with a mid major (and Xavier is big time, hardly a mid major by any fiscal measure). Even Gonzaga has to schedule "semi-neutral" games at Key Arena to get most BCS teams to come play them in non-conf. Any mid major coach will tell you that the only time a BCS school will come play you on your court is if your team is down. They will avoid it like the plauge if there is even a whiff of a chance of losing. This is why Utah State perenially goes through the same issue every year, winning 25 games and being on the bubble. Nobody will go play them from a BCS conference. They get home games every other year with their in state rivals BYU and Utah and that's as close as they get to a major power visiting Logan. The power of BCS conferences is as much in the scheduling as it is in the funding. The Big East behemoth's power is its size. It's a mini-kingdom. Everbody benefits from playing everybody else and they don't have to worry about extending themselves in non-conf. It's quite advantageous. So, for Stevens, as long as he knows he can get big teams to come to Hinkle, that's a HUGE difference. I garauntee that if more mid majors were in that position, even fewer coaches would leave.

By the way, as far as I know, Purdue and IU still won't go to Hinkle, but there is plan for a mini-Indiana themed tournament with Butler, Valpo, IU, and Purdue to be played at Conseco fieldhouse. Here are links to an in depth interview with Brad Stevens:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cX94epTmLrE part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vROpUJ0OfiQ&feature=related part 2

4/13/2011 12:55 AM (edited)

garger

Posts: 96 (0)

Hall of Famer

126 37 4

Prospect

Good points, jk. That's why I find the ESPN 'Bracket Buster' series so dumb. A bunch of good middies beating each other up when it should be middie contenders vs. BCS bubble teams. That would promote some good middies up to the NT at the expense of mediocre BCS squads.

4/13/2011 1:35 AM

alblack56

Posts: 3329 (0)

Hall of Famer

490

Pro

I agre, garger. I think the BracketBuster is a ploy by the BCS to eliminate more mid-majors from consideration. LOL

4/13/2011 4:19 AM

alblack56

Posts: 3329 (0)

Hall of Famer

490

Pro

Mid-major coaches would do well to consider Georgetown. When John Thompson went there in the late 70's, they were coming off a 3-23 season and had two NIT first round losses in the previous 25 years...that's it. They were mid-major or below. He had them in the NCAA within 3 years. There's no way Georgetown would've been invited into the Big East in 1984 if Thompson had't built that program. We'd probably see them in the Colonial with George Mason and VCU.

Thompson proved you can stay at a private mid-major school and win consistently.

4/13/2011 4:24 AM

girt25

Posts: 2136 (0)

Hall of Famer

1 122 1 1

Rookie

I know it's fashionable to say, "Look, mid-majors can really compete for the Final Four/national championship" now, but I don't believe it and think that Butler the last two seasons (and yes, VCU) will prove to be a major anomaly.

4/13/2011 7:30 AM

alblack56

Posts: 3329 (0)

Hall of Famer

490

Pro

Posted by girt25 on 4/13/2011 7:30:00 AM (view original):
I know it's fashionable to say, "Look, mid-majors can really compete for the Final Four/national championship" now, but I don't believe it and think that Butler the last two seasons (and yes, VCU) will prove to be a major anomaly.

I hope you're wrong. We've had several strong showings from mid-majors in the past 10 years.   Even though they don't like it, I'm including Xavier, Gonzaga and Memphis. They think of themselves as 'major' but, realistically, they're two bad seasons from losing that status.

2011- VCU and Butler
            Also BYU, Richmond, and San Diego St. in the Sweet 16

2010- Butler
         Sweet 16- St. Mary's, Cornell, Xavier and No. Iowa

2009- Sweet 16- Gonzaga and Xavier

2008- Memphis RU
            Elite Eight- Davidson and Xavier
            Sweet 16- Western Kentucky

2007- Elite Eight- Memphis
             Sweet 16- So. Illinois, Butler, UNLV (these 3 lost by a total of 12 points)

2006- George Mason- Final Four
           Sweet 16- Witchita St. Bradley, Gonzaga

2005- Sweet 16- Wisconsin-Milwaukee

2004- Elite Eight= St. Joseph's and Xavier (lost by a total of 5 points)

2002- Elite Eight - Kent State

2001- Elite Eight- Temple

4/13/2011 10:48 AM

wronoj

Posts: 893 (0)

Hall of Famer

179 1

Rookie

the interesting thing to me is that there is very little repetition in your list (Xavier aside). It seems to me (and did before I saw this list, too) that there is a better chance for a mid-major to make a deep run than there ever has been, but that it's still exceedingly difficult to keep one at/near the top.

4/13/2011 10:57 AM

alblack56

Posts: 3329 (0)

Hall of Famer

490

Pro

Eastern Michigan has asked permission to talk to Texas Southern coach Tony Harvey. The SWAC 'Coach of the Year', he led them to the regular-season title and an NIT berth. He was an assistant at E. Michigan from 1995-99

4/13/2011 11:20 AM

girt25

Posts: 2136 (0)

Hall of Famer

1 122 1 1

Rookie

Posted by alblack56 on 4/13/2011 10:48:00 AM (view original):
Posted by girt25 on 4/13/2011 7:30:00 AM (view original):
I know it's fashionable to say, "Look, mid-majors can really compete for the Final Four/national championship" now, but I don't believe it and think that Butler the last two seasons (and yes, VCU) will prove to be a major anomaly.
I hope you're wrong. We've had several strong showings from mid-majors in the past 10 years.   Even though they don't like it, I'm including Xavier, Gonzaga and Memphis. They think of themselves as 'major' but, realistically, they're two bad seasons from losing that status.

2011- VCU and Butler
            Also BYU, Richmond, and San Diego St. in the Sweet 16

2010- Butler
         Sweet 16- St. Mary's, Cornell, Xavier and No. Iowa

2009- Sweet 16- Gonzaga and Xavier

2008- Memphis RU
            Elite Eight- Davidson and Xavier
            Sweet 16- Western Kentucky

2007- Elite Eight- Memphis
             Sweet 16- So. Illinois, Butler, UNLV (these 3 lost by a total of 12 points)

2006- George Mason- Final Four
           Sweet 16- Witchita St. Bradley, Gonzaga

2005- Sweet 16- Wisconsin-Milwaukee

2004- Elite Eight= St. Joseph's and Xavier (lost by a total of 5 points)

2002- Elite Eight - Kent State

2001- Elite Eight- Temple

I hope I'm wrong too, al.

And even though they've been good for over a decade now, I'll give you Zaga as a mid-major, but not a Calipari-coached Memphis squad. Can't do it, lol.

And I think S16's are very possible -- almost always will be plenty of upsets, and well-coached veteran mid-major teams are very tough in the tourney.

But I'm more specifically talking about all these people who are now saying that non-BCS teams are going to be able to make F4 runs, and that I just don't see.

4/13/2011 12:12 PM

jkline

Posts: 195 (0)

Rookie

9

Prospect

I don't think the popular definition of "mid major" as any school in a non-BCS conference is one that makes sense. A more sensible definition would be one that is based on the budget of the basketball team. If the team is spending around the same amount of money as their BCS counterparts, then they should be considered on the same "major" level. By that definition, Xavier, Gonzaga, and Memphis are not mid-majors. I believe that Xavier is on the same level with Cincinnati. Gonzaga is comparable to Washington State. Memphis is comparable to Tennessee. These schools have much smaller total thletic budgets, but because they either don't have football or don't really care about football, they have made basketball the focal point of their thletic departments and can compete dollar for dollar with big time universities for whom basketball is a distant second in importance. When you think about it that way, it isn't hard at all to believe that some of these so-called mid-majors can compete every bit as much as the "majors." Butler is small potatoes compared to IU and is a true mid-major. Many of the Mountain West (or ex-Mountain West) schools are not really "mid-major." BYU is not constrained by budget, only by their unusual admissions requirements, for example.

4/13/2011 6:07 PM (edited)

Iguana1

Posts: 369 (0)

Hall of Famer

69 65

Rookie

Butler's recruiting budget the past few years has ranged between $60,000 and $75,000.

Of the public Universities, Kentucky spent the most at about $435,000. Kansas was second at $420,000 (reportedly Duke's is over $700,000). National Champion UConn was around $175,000 and Wisconsin was lowest in the big six conferences, with just over $57,000.

http://www.cardchronicle.com/2011/3/25/2072515/louisville-recruiting-budget-ranks-among-top-10-nationally-1-in-big

4/13/2011 6:46 PM (edited)

Forums

DI Coaching Carousel Topic

Search Criteria