Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 23:54:14 GMT -6
From a thread on the MAC message board site rating MAC basketball programs: "This is the latest in Stadium’s “Conference Chain of Command” series in which we polled a handful of veteran coaches in every league to determine the best JOBS in each league, all the way down to the ones that are the most difficult. Here are the eight categories that were utilized to determine the overall rankings". Tradition – The history of the program Media Exposure – Games on national television Game Atmosphere – Includes attendance Budget/Resources – Includes coaches’ salaries, recruiting budget, travel budget, private planes, cost of attendance, etc. Buy Games – Programs who are bought the fewest number of times will rank first Geographical Recruiting Base – Proximity to players Facilities – Not just the arena, but also practice facilities, weight room, locker rooms, etc. Selling Pros – Being able to sell not only NBA players, but also those who play overseas Ball State comes in at #5 in this poll/ranking with the following: Ball State – The Cardinals have been to seven NCAA Tournaments and advanced to a Sweet 16 back in 1990 under Dick Hunsaker. Ball State, known as the school that produced Bonzi Wells, hasn’t been to the NCAA tourney since 2000 — Ray McCallum’s final season at the helm. Tim Buckley couldn’t do it in six seasons, Ronny Thompson failed in his lone year in Muncie, Billy Taylor was 0-for-6 and current coach James Whitford hasn’t been able to do it in his first five seasons. Where they win: “Location, campus and facilities.” – MAC head coach The knock: “Resources. They don’t pay their coaches enough, and don’t have the resources that the top programs in the league have.” – MAC assistant coach Link to whole posting can be found here: watchstadium.com/news/mac-college-basketball-coaches-rank-the-best-jobs-in-the-conference-01-10-2019/ |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Jan 17, 2019 6:37:52 GMT -6
Ummmmmmmmmmmm......................Yeah except if one of our more recent coaches had produced, he likely would have been given a nice salary bump, and a larger budget to work with. That's the way it works, even with most power six schools.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2019 7:16:22 GMT -6
You can argue, and I’m sure you will, but both times the university flirted with “Big Time” basketball maneuvers (1988, 2007) they got the pee scared out of them.
Now we hide behind the budget. You can ALWAYS hide behind a budget.
|
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Jan 17, 2019 8:10:34 GMT -6
Now we hide behind the budget. You can ALWAYS hide behind a budget. Ain't that the truth. I can't wait to hear Fred Glass a year from now when the shit really hit's the fan at IU. It's going to be all about funding levels and unrealistic expectations. The fact he has made series of bad hires, in multiple sports, will be the furthest thing from the Universities' talking points. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 17, 2019 8:32:30 GMT -6
Ummmmmmmmmmmm......................Yeah except if one of our more recent coaches had produced, he likely would have been given a nice salary bump, and a larger budget to work with. That's the way it works, even with most power six schools. A nice bump is a band aid unless you start the coach with a good salary.
It is a band aid usually anyway. The good coaches move up. The key is to pay enough to attract good coaches in the first place and when they leave the next coach thinks it is a good job, plus the cupboard is not bare.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jan 17, 2019 8:34:26 GMT -6
You can argue, and I’m sure you will, but both times the university flirted with “Big Time” basketball maneuvers (1988, 2007) they got the pee scared out of them. Now we hide behind the budget. You can ALWAYS hide behind a budget. Yes. But it is a real factor. Not at IU. But they have a lot of other things going for them there, too. It takes a colossal series of mistakes to run IU basketball into the cellar. The AD's there certainly have proved that. |
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on Jan 17, 2019 8:48:43 GMT -6
Somewhere in this wide world is someone willing to take what BSU is offering to show how great they are.
In my opinion salary is only relevant when it comes to retaining a great coach, not obtaining one. We certainly can't expect an established great coach to take a step down in pay to come here; we have to find the up-and-comer who is ambitious and wants to use a stop in Muncie on his rise.
It's like all the people who kept saying PJ Fleck shouldn't take the Purdue job because it was a dead-end. In PJ Fleck's mind there is no job that's a dead-end for him. Every job is a step on his inevitable rise to the top. [I'm not saying he'll reach the top, I'm describing his viewpoint.] We need coaches like that.
I'm also not saying those guys are easy to find. After his first year I thought PJ Fleck was a incompetent moron. Now I just think he's a moron. The WMU AD saw something and it worked out.
|
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on Jan 17, 2019 9:00:15 GMT -6
Lower starting salary is an issue that could readily be overcome when hiring a new coach. There are plenty of sharp young coaches around who would jump at the BSU opportunity to show what they can do. Granted you may have trouble KEEPING a coach who demonstrates success, but it would be nice to actually be in that position for a change.
BSU's biggest issue in hiring is NOT money. It's the total incompetence demonstrated by the administration in the choosing process. Just to mention a couple of extreme, but highly relevant examples;
1) How completely did Gora and crew have to bungle the hiring and vetting process to end up with puddle of diarrhea like Ronny Thompson. That guy must have left a multitude of huge red flags everywhere he went. He was a nasty, racist piece of filth and didn't put a lot of effort into hiding the fact.
2) On the other hand, how much did Barry Collier have to pay to attract Brad Stevens? He probably could have picked him up for minimum wage if he really wanted to. Seriously.
If BSU had a sharp, competent, somewhat innovative AD, who paid close attention to what it took to win in the MAC, He could offer something around the lowest current MAC coaching salary and have his pick among many eager, intelligent, young coaches to choose from. If the AD had a clear, intelligent vision and was able to form and ask perceptive questions in the interviews, he wouldn't have to rely on the resumes. Impressive resumes and experience are what cost money....not necessarily quality. |
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on Jan 17, 2019 9:09:40 GMT -6
Ronny was not vetted. Period. He’d be been he wouldn’t have been hired. My understanding is there were coaches out there that would’ve told bsu to stay away from , but they were not asked....
Don’t forget, we had been told that brad brownell would be the next coach. He was on campus when that word went out. And then suddenly he was gone and Wright st was hiring him instead. Gora/buddy totally crapped on that one. And we go with Ronny instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Jan 17, 2019 9:11:09 GMT -6
Ummmmmmmmmmmm......................Yeah except if one of our more recent coaches had produced, he likely would have been given a nice salary bump, and a larger budget to work with. That's the way it works, even with most power six schools. A nice bump is a band aid unless you start the coach with a good salary.
It is a band aid usually anyway. The good coaches move up. The key is to pay enough to attract good coaches in the first place and when they leave the next coach thinks it is a good job, plus the cupboard is not bare.
Yeah Brad Stevens started out making $190,000 and was eventually making over a $ 1 Million while still in the Horizon League. Have you ever spent a single day in real world ? The key dumbass is to make good hiring decisions. As-far-as moving up, I hope we lose our coach every three years. |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Jan 17, 2019 9:12:48 GMT -6
You can argue, and I’m sure you will, but both times the university flirted with “Big Time” basketball maneuvers (1988, 2007) they got the pee scared out of them. Now we hide behind the budget. You can ALWAYS hide behind a budget. Yes. But it is a real factor. Not at IU. But they have a lot of other things going for them there, too. It takes a colossal series of mistakes to run IU basketball into the cellar. The AD's there certainly have proved that. Oh I see, so now you are arguing the opposite side. |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Jan 17, 2019 9:13:36 GMT -6
In my opinion salary is only relevant when it comes to retaining a great coach, not obtaining one. Bingo............................. |
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on Jan 17, 2019 9:18:27 GMT -6
I don't have any real understanding of the market for head coaches, but if I were an AD I think I'd have the understanding with a basketball coach that if they hadn't won a championship in three years they're gone.
Anyone who would be afraid to take the job with that condition I don't think I'd want anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by comet on Jan 17, 2019 9:46:13 GMT -6
Lower starting salary is an issue that could readily be overcome when hiring a new coach. There are plenty of sharp young coaches around who would jump at the BSU opportunity to show what they can do. Granted you may have trouble KEEPING a coach who demonstrates success, but it would be nice to actually be in that position for a change.
BSU's biggest issue in hiring is NOT money. It's the total incompetence demonstrated by the administration in the choosing process. Just to mention a couple of extreme, but highly relevant examples;
1) How completely did Gora and crew have to bungle the hiring and vetting process to end up with puddle of diarrhea like Ronny Thompson. That guy must have left a multitude of huge red flags everywhere he went. He was a nasty, racist piece of filth and didn't put a lot of effort into hiding the fact.
2) On the other hand, how much did Barry Collier have to pay to attract Brad Stevens? He probably could have picked him up for minimum wage if he really wanted to. Seriously.
If BSU had a sharp, competent, somewhat innovative AD, who paid close attention to what it took to win in the MAC, He could offer something around the lowest current MAC coaching salary and have his pick among many eager, intelligent, young coaches to choose from. If the AD had a clear, intelligent vision and was able to form and ask perceptive questions in the interviews, he wouldn't have to rely on the resumes. Impressive resumes and experience are what cost money....not necessarily quality.
FYI, "puddle of diarrhea" is one of the best descriptive phrases I have ever read on this board, or elsewhere for that matter. Especially for Thompson.
Great !!!!!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Jan 17, 2019 10:20:15 GMT -6
Please stop saying that name.
|
|
