|
Post by williamtsherman on Feb 4, 2019 9:28:32 GMT -6
The kind of smart, young, ambitious, innovative, confident coach we should be looking for is not obsessed with money, but he is absolutely dying for an opportunity to show what he can do. Anyway, he's probably making about jack squat in his current job. Nor would he particularly care how the last failed coach was pushed out. That would have no relevance for him. He will not identify with James Whitford.
Of course, this sort of coach is not going to have an extensive track record to comfort you when you choose him. If you have basically incompetent people running your coaching search, comfort is very important. But an extensive track record is going to cost you money.....and an extensive track record plus a dynamic, innovative personality is going to be out or our reach, financially. This is where we have been stuck and this is why we end up with the likes of Billy Taylor.
Here is the Sherman plan:
1) Ideally, we would have one or more savvy, intelligent people running our search. These people would look deeply into what makes a MAC coach successful in recruiting and winning (mostly the same thing). They would then vet and interview with these factors in mind. This search team would have the self-confidence not to require an extensive track record. The money is no longer a key limiting factor. The opportunity is the overwhelming attraction to the type of candidate we seek. Our candidates will be absolutely salivating to put their ideas into action with a mid-major program.
2) Naturally there is some risk involved in hiring a young coach with less of a track record. That's why you need to be prepared to pull the plug quickly on a failure - two to three years. The quality of the coach will become apparent within a couple years...as it almost always does. You set the contract up so the plug can be pulled when necessary. Again, this will not deter the sort of candidates we seek.
This plan will make some nervous, because it's...you know...different. But my view is: what the f--- do we have to lose? How well has the standard way of doing things worked out for us? The real roadblock to my plan that we need those savvy, intelligent people to execute it (e.g. Barry Collier). The BSU administration has been notably lacking in that sort of person for some time now.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Feb 4, 2019 14:29:58 GMT -6
OK.
How do we solve that little problem?
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Feb 4, 2019 15:02:59 GMT -6
Well, first of all, I know little to nothing about the current President and AD. But let's assume they are no real improvement on the recent past. Let's also assume there is no hope of replacing them with savvy people anytime soon.
So, it would follow that we need someone from outside the current administration to head up the search. I don't believe the typical "search firm" has the specific expertise needed. Since Barry Collier is sort of my model for this approach, that suggests an ex-coach as consultant and head of the hiring team might be the logical choice. Of course, it's going to be very difficult to replicate Collier. He is very competent AND had a history with Butler that gave him the vision on who to pick as coach. Furthermore, he became AD so he had a strong motivation to do a good job.
Ray McCallum? Hmmmm. Interesting idea. Would Ray have any interest in this? Would Ray be open to studying the recent MAC success stories to see what has changed since his days here? I don't know. A pitfall of using and ex-coach is that the guy might be stuck in some old pattern of thinking, and I'm talking about a new, different concept. By the way, where is Ray these days?
Whoever the consultant person is, I would look to attract them with a hefty amount of $, which would come out of the savings from the lower coach salary. Also I would set up a system of bonuses based on the eventual accomplishments of the coach hired.
And I admit I have a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem also. The current administration would have to choose the consultant, and we've already assumed they aren't competent to choose the coach, so....
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Feb 4, 2019 15:04:49 GMT -6
I can do this
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Feb 4, 2019 15:24:54 GMT -6
The first question I would ask candidates (in person, without any prior warning) is "Who are you going to recruit to win a MAC championship and how are you going to lure them here?" Note that by "who" I'm not looking for names, but rather profiles and types of players.
The coach I'm looking for would launch into a lengthy and energetic discourse on what he would look for at different positions. The more specificity, the more I would be impressed. He would be bursting with so many ideas that I would eventually have to cut him off from talking...after maybe 90 minutes or so. Anyone who started into a lot of common coach-talk generalities would be quickly cut off, thanked for his time, and shown the door. I would also give each candidate a chance to send back a written answer to the same question after, say, 10 days or so....giving them a chance to do some research and further thinking.
Given that our candidates will be younger and probably lacking head coach experience, I would strongly recommend having an older coach with head coach experience on the staff to reduce the learning curve on running a program.
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Feb 4, 2019 15:26:58 GMT -6
All the dingbats on THIS board are, of course, disqualified. If fact, you should all be rounded up and sent out of the country somewhere while all this is going on.
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Feb 4, 2019 15:42:16 GMT -6
All the dingbats on THIS board are, of course, disqualified. If fact, you should all be rounded up and sent out of the country somewhere while all this is going on.
Horseshit I am qualified
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Feb 4, 2019 15:53:57 GMT -6
All the dingbats on THIS board are, of course, disqualified. If fact, you should all be rounded up and sent out of the country somewhere while all this is going on.
Horseshit I am qualified See cardfan has faith in me.. I just have to channel my football expertise into basketball terms
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Feb 4, 2019 15:56:00 GMT -6
All the dingbats on THIS board are, of course, disqualified. If fact, you should all be rounded up and sent out of the country somewhere while all this is going on.
Horseshit I am qualified That is your vision statement! Clearly a finalist in my mind.
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Feb 4, 2019 16:00:26 GMT -6
Calhoun has big ideas! Especially regarding weenies and beer.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Feb 4, 2019 17:17:56 GMT -6
I think that kind of thinking brought us Coach Majerus.
|
|
|
Post by rmcalhoun on Feb 4, 2019 18:17:26 GMT -6
I think that kind of thinking brought us Coach Majerus. exactly
|
|
|
Post by mattg on Feb 4, 2019 18:30:49 GMT -6
Well, first of all, I know little to nothing about the current President and AD. But let's assume they are no real improvement on the recent past. Let's also assume there is no hope of replacing them with savvy people anytime soon.
So, it would follow that we need someone from outside the current administration to head up the search. I don't believe the typical "search firm" has the specific expertise needed. Since Barry Collier is sort of my model for this approach, that suggests an ex-coach as consultant and head of the hiring team might be the logical choice. Of course, it's going to be very difficult to replicate Collier. He is very competent AND had a history with Butler that gave him the vision on who to pick as coach. Furthermore, he became AD so he had a strong motivation to do a good job.
Ray McCallum? Hmmmm. Interesting idea. Would Ray have any interest in this? Would Ray be open to studying the recent MAC success stories to see what has changed since his days here? I don't know. A pitfall of using and ex-coach is that the guy might be stuck in some old pattern of thinking, and I'm talking about a new, different concept. By the way, where is Ray these days?
Whoever the consultant person is, I would look to attract them with a hefty amount of $, which would come out of the savings from the lower coach salary. Also I would set up a system of bonuses based on the eventual accomplishments of the coach hired.
And I admit I have a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem also. The current administration would have to choose the consultant, and we've already assumed they aren't competent to choose the coach, so.... I believe he’s an assistant at Georgia State right now.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2019 18:52:24 GMT -6
See cardfan has faith in me.. I just have to channel my football expertise into basketball terms It’s long been rumored that you and Cardfan are one in the same due to a software glitch in Alan’s website. Many envision that you(s), due to the lopsided “post counts”, are locked up in a dark closet with a laptop, slingTV and a fast internet connection. I, for one, don’t believe this type of TMZ witch-hunt and respect the opinion(s) of both. Who’s buying the beer when we 🦇 are escorted to the border to wait out the selection process?
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Feb 4, 2019 19:05:19 GMT -6
Based on some quick googling, it appears assistants make anywhere from 20K to, at the very highest programs, 150K. Some dated info shows the lowest MAC coaches around 350K with Dambrot making a little over 1M.
So I broadcast that BSU is looking for a coach who they will pay 170K base yearly salary - two year contract. Bonus of 50K for top 6 regular season MAC finish. Bonus of 50K for each MAC tourney win and 100K for MAC championship. (or something like that...exact bonus scheme TBD). Applicants must submit a letter describing their ideas for winning at the mid-major level. It will be explained that those with lesser experience are encouraged to apply and are not necessarily disadvantaged in the search criteria.
Application letters can be filtered down by a fairly large, not-highly-paid staff, who will be trained to look for references to certain concepts, phrases and keywords. they would also be told to go ahead and pass on anything significantly out of the ordinary. Then the core search team would go through what passes through. They would be looking for IDEAS, not experience or familiarity with buzz words and clichés. General intelligence and communication skills can be judged by how well the ideas are explained and expressed.
Then the interviews start.
|
|