I'm going to start pushing hard for John Brennan.
http://nkunorse.com/coaches.aspx?path=mbball&rc=405
http://nkunorse.com/coaches.aspx?path=mbball&rc=405
Retread or lottery ticket?
- Thread starter Sean Miller Fan
- Start date
Might be a good coach and might be a success here but the average Pitt fan will not have a clue who this guy is and the reaction to this hire would do nothing to elevate the perception of this program with the fan base.
This is true; however, aside from a Sean Miller or a Calipari... how many name brand guys are there? I don't think Danny Hurley is a household name to the basic sports fan in Pittsburgh. There are only a handful of guys out there that can move the needle as far as attendance is concerned.
Yeah probably correct although I think Hurley name alone would carry much more weight. But admittedly probably half the fans would think it was Bobby Hurley from Duke. LOL.
I seriously believe no coach at all would be an improvement over what has been going on
Gregg Marshall??? I always liked the idea of Wojo but he isn't exactly tearing it up at Marquette.
Oates might be a little light from a resume background. I like Joe Dooley nice background and his assistants look capable. Mike Hopkins is another person I would give a long look at along with Pat Kelsey but he's lost a couple of points. Gregg Marshall would be great but as I have mentioned in the past he's quirky South Carolina thought they had him before hiring Frank Martin at the end he started asking for terms that weren't part of the original deal and he walked away.
Thad Matta is probably the best Pitt could do if he is able and willing to coach again
Just about anyone not named Kevin Stallings is going to elevate the perception of the program at least somewhat.
Yes, I know, as the coach of not-Pitt with a very brief resume, he possesses every quality that our current head coach does not possess, just like all of those guys who were way better than Dixon after a couple good years at a non-P5 school.
I don’t think I’m hot taking here when I say that hiring a more accomplished coach who is the same age as Musselman makes more sense for Pitt if they aren’t going to go young. He’s not some young guy tearing it up.
It's almost as if you don't know that Musselman was a pro coach for most of his coaching career. He's been a head coach either in college or the pros for 15 seasons. The notion that that makes up a "very brief" resume is silly.
I do not think that coaching at the P5 level is in any way similar to coaching in the pros, and I would pretty much throw away almost any D-League experience given how little autonomy those coaches have.
I'm not saying P5 coaches are better coaches than in the NBA, but the responsibilities in terms of roster management, decisions, and accountability are nowhere close to the same, nor is the ability to acquire talent in a predictable manner or compete on a relatively level playing field.
He's a year older than Avery Johnson, was less successful than him as a NBA coach, and will be 3 years behind him in terms of experience -- most likely you're looking at a guy who is Stallings' age by the time he's anywhere close to nationally relevant if things go as well as possible.
You are too fixated on Musselman’s age. He looks and acts like he is in his 40’s. He is a ferocious competitor. The challenge of the ACC might very well appeal to him. He is a very good coach.
If 51 was an issue for Dixon and 56 was an issue for Stallings, I see no reason why 53 with a 3+ year time horizon for when he'll be competitive isn't an issue for a guy with zero P5 experience.
Again, I don't care how a guy acts or looks. I've been told the guys in their 50's are stubborn and past their primes and have no potential, I don't see any reason a random 53 year old at a mid-major would possess those things and get a pass on it.
People say they want youth and potential and a guy Pitt can grow with, then all of a sudden a 53-year old is exciting.
No, I think the age is really relevant. I mean if he coaches as long as Coach K then he's only got 18 years and counting to go. If he coaches as long as Roy Williams he only has 14 years and counting. Jim Boeheim, 20 years and counting. Clearly, not nearly enough time to establish himself.
The idea that 53 is old for a college coach is silly.
The idea that 53 is old for a college coach is silly.
Again, Stallings is washed up at 56 and Dixon was too old to adapt when he was 51. I'm just repeating this board.
51 wasn't an issue for Dixon, at least not for anyone with an ounce of common sense, and Stallings problem isn't that he's 56, it's that he was never more than a mediocre college basketball coach.
If the best way for you to make an argument is to compare it to what one or two idiots might say then you might want to give some thought to the strength of the argument that you are making.
And Eric Musselman, despite being just 3 years younger and totally unproven, is appealing because....he might become a mediocre P5 coach if he hits his 90th percentile outcome at the P5 level?
You are either clueless or intentionally trolling. The guy has proven to be a good coach at the pro and collegiate level.
Once again, 15 years as a head coach. The notion that he's unproven is one that you've got stuck in your head but doesn't actually match up to reality.
Musselman has a better coaching resume right now than Kevin Stallings has ever had. There is no chance, literally none what so ever, than any NBA team would have ever hired Kevin Stallings as their head coach.
I feel like everybody is just glossing over the part about how winning at the P5 level requires a totally different skill set than coaching at the professional level.
Reggie Theus got hired as an NBA head coach. Wanna poach him from Cal State Northridge?
Why not target Avery Johnson? Far more accomplished as a professional coach. Alabama isn't a great job, at least not compared to how wonderful I've been told the Pitt job is.
You literally posted a thread saying Andy Toole could be a nice, low cost option.
What am I supposed to do, live in a fantasy world and pretend like anybody would be a wonderful option? I'm supposed to think Nathan Davis should be considered anything but an utter failure of a hire?
I posted a thread that countered the narrative that nobody Pitt could hire for a reasonable price would put butts in seats. That was literally my only point.
You are the definition of a troll right now. You are repeatedly arguing a point, that coaches 50+ can’t win, even though you don’t agree with it and know it is indefensible.
I am saying that if you are going in the 50+ range, it makes more sense to hire a retread or a sitting P5 coach who is in a Dixon situation than a mid-major coach.
That guy is a complete douche. He wants Creayin’ Crean over Musselman. Enough said.
I mean, I don't want Crean, my hope is that Pitt doesn't get to that point in their search.
I don't think you need to worry about the average Yinzer. They'll care when we are Top 25ish. However, the average Yinzer knows the Hurley name, not that that matters. Pitt needs to energize Pitt fans and these no-name guys don't do that. There aren't any guys out there like Keatts, Underwood, Drew, or the Texas Tech coach. There was a deep pool of talented mid-major coaches but that has mostly dried up. Now you are stuck with an old journeyman like Musselman who has had success in an unorthodox manner, a young Buffalo coach who was coaching HS ball ip until 5 years ago, and a bunch of guys that just don't even begin to move the needle in terms of excitement (Becker, Grant, etc). This is why I dont mind a retread like Crean, a coach who has cheated like Pitino or Sampson, or an assistant like Capel, Scheyer, or Sanchez
It's why I would hire the retread over the mid-major coach.
If the argument has been that guys are what they are once they hit their 50's and Pitt should try to get younger, then there is no reason to bring in a guy to do a job he has never done before.
I'm willing to entertain the argument that going young has merits because you bring in a guy who you can grow with and who has some potential over the long-term.
I don't buy that nearly as much with a guy in his 50's, and if people on this board were consistent they wouldn't buy it either.
You act as though Keatts, Underwood, Drew, and Beard were sure things at the time. They were Mid-Majors and a crap shoot when hired. Stop trying to change history.
This might blow your mind, but the board isn’t monolithic. There are plenty of idiots on every side of an argument, even without your trolling added in for good measure.
Personally, Crean and Sanchez would be my top two candidates.
None of those guys would have energize the average Pitt fan. The average Pitt fan doesn't pay any attention at all to what is going on at places like UNC-Wilmington or Valparaiso. The average Pitt fan would have had no idea who Keatts or Underwood were if they were hired, and they only would have known who Drew was because he made that shot against Mississippi in the NCAA tournament.
Pitt needs to hire a good coach and stop worrying about hiring a "name" coach. A "name" coach gets you Kevin Stallings. The only thing that is going to energize the Pitt fan base is winning basketball games. Hire the guy who is most likely to do that and then hope for the best.
There were people who argued that Kevin Stallings was a good hire. Just because sometimes some people say something dumb doesn't mean that the whole world believes that stupid thing.
I more or less said that earlier in this thread, for what it's worth. I don't think I'm trolling all that much, I just think Musselman is a horrible fit and that going back to Dixon's tenure there's always been a tendency to overrate mid-major coaches to a severe degree and it's happened again all year this year.
I mean, I think that's a reasonable argument to be made if the other side is "we should hire Eric Musselman/random low-major coach/guy who I googled who isn't named Kevin Stallings" instead.
That's just looking at the situation emotionally and trying to argue for a dumb decision just because you don't like the coach's face. I think those arguments hold as much merit now as they did when they were constantly made about Dixon -- and similar to the coaches we clamored for when Dixon was here I would guess most of them will flame out or fail to come close to the lofty expectations we placed on them.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
My guess as to why this site is STILL in 'no mans land' at the moment
- Latest: Guyasuta Genac
-
