What do you think about the one year audition for KO?

Discussion in 'UConn Men's Basketball' started by DogMania, Sep 13, 2012.

  1. upstater

    upstater

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2011
    Messages:
    19,821
    Likes Received:
    9,547
    I just totally disagree with you here. For the type of players they had, it's amazing they designed an offense where you knew Kemba and Lamb were taking all the shots, and yet the opponents could do little about it. That takes some doing.
     
  2. HuskyBballFan

    HuskyBballFan

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,889
    Likes Received:
    2,327
    Thank you for pointing out that "knowing the game is important." My point was in response to the Syracuse fan claiming that Mike Hopkins automatically has a leg up on Ollie because of his years as an assistant coach. The number of years of coaching experience doesn't automatically translate to coaching success. George Blaney has forgotten more about basketball than any of us will ever know, yet he still hasn't figured out when to call timeouts.
     
    upstater likes this.
  3. IthacaMatt

    IthacaMatt

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2011
    Messages:
    358
    Likes Received:
    42

    Look, if playing and coaching were equivalent skills, we'd see a lot more former players step in as coaches without any (or with little) previous coaching experience. And for some reason, we don't. Now, you can judge that for yourself. But to most unbiased observers, Ollie is a stretch hire, and most people wouldn't place him in the top group of potential coaches for your program. That's why Manuel wants to get to do his own search. And to make such a public statement of only giving Ollie a 7 month contract speaks volumes that Manuel wants to cut his financial exposure to the point where it comes off as a vote of no confidence in Ollie. This thread has already gone on too long, now, so I'll just bow out with that observation.
     
    freescooter likes this.
  4. caw

    caw

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2011
    Messages:
    5,311
    Likes Received:
    2,789
    Yes, but UConn fans love Ollie mostly.

    BTW not everyone spends a ton of years as an assistant:

    Billy Donovan 5
    Jim Calhoun 0
    Phil Jackson 2
    Calipari 6
    John Wooden 0
    Jerry Tarkanian 0
    John Thompson Jr. 0
    John Thompson III 5
    Pete Carril 0 (before being head coach of Princeton, became an assistant after)
    Bob Huggins 4
    John Chaney 0
    Lute Olson 1
    Mike Kryzewski 1
    Bobby Knight 3

    Some of those were players, some did coach at lower levels (high school, D2, etc.) but they weren't assistants.

    Let me know if I'm off a year or two.
     
  5. upstater

    upstater

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2011
    Messages:
    19,821
    Likes Received:
    9,547
    We do see former players do it. in the NBA it happens a lot. I gave you the Billy Donovan example as well. As for Warde Manuel, I think he's making a mistake. Calhoun knows more han he does about this, surely.
     
  6. Waquoit

    Waquoit

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2011
    Messages:
    11,205
    Likes Received:
    7,732
    So if I read this right, the only guys you mention under the age of 50 were assistants for at least 5 years. Times have changed, I don't think you prove your case here.
     
  7. caw

    caw

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2011
    Messages:
    5,311
    Likes Received:
    2,789
    OK, change the goalpost. I see nothing about young coaches in the post I was replying to... I think this amply shows that good/great coaches don't need to be assistants, BTW how many good (let alone great) coaches are even under 50?

    To answer your question, yes, it is nearly impossible to become a head coach without being an assistant first these days, but is that due to over-saturation in the coaching ranks or the actual need to be an assistant first? I think the older guys show it may be the former and not the later.

    Fred Hoiberg 0 years
    Dan Hurley 5 years
    Brad Stevens 6 years

    I'm sure you will recognize the first name. The post I was responding to was in regards to seeing coaches with little to no experience.

    BTW: Five is a lot closer to two than to sixteen and is a relatively short time overall.
     
  8. freescooter

    freescooter

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2011
    Messages:
    6,293
    Likes Received:
    2,113
    yeah, I mean look at how many of Calhoun's assistants are coaching big time programs...Why Woodward at Maine has done pretty well, Moore is doing ok at Quinnipiac, oh and Leatio just got hired at Missouri...well as an assitant, not the head coach. Oh and Howie...can't think of any others who have made it as head coaches...they have all washed out at the mid-major level.
     
  9. Waquoit

    Waquoit

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2011
    Messages:
    11,205
    Likes Received:
    7,732
    That's a bit harsh. All of his guys had good runs. Too bad for Leitao, DePaul was the spot for him. But that's why Ollie is the man on the throne now. No way JC was going to sell (or an AD was going to buy) a guy who is coming off of being fired from his last HC job.
     
  10. HuskyBballFan

    HuskyBballFan

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Messages:
    2,889
    Likes Received:
    2,327
    Running off that list of names is meaningless. Calhoun has only had two assistants in his tenure who he felt were worthy of being the next coach at Uconn - Ollie and Tom Moore. If you want to use Moore as an example of failure...I think that's a bit unfair but whatever. But Ted Woodward's lack of success at Maine doesn't have the slightest bit to do with Kevin Ollie.
     
  11. caw

    caw

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2011
    Messages:
    5,311
    Likes Received:
    2,789
    Then maybe the fact Ollie was only under Calhoun's tutelage for 2 years as an assistant is a good thing. I'm kidding of course.
     
  12. nelsonmuntz

    nelsonmuntz Point Center

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    15,980
    Likes Received:
    5,266
    Another reason this is a bad idea is that if Manuel doesn't hire Ollie permanently, it will look like he didn't get a fair chance. If he gives Ollie a 3 year deal, and he stinks it up so bad he has to go at the end of the year, I think everyone would understand. But tying his hands behind his back and then asking him to be successful will strike many, like Donny Marshall's quote indicated, as unfair.
     
  13. freescooter

    freescooter

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2011
    Messages:
    6,293
    Likes Received:
    2,113
    nelson I agree with some of this, but I don't really know what choice he had on a bad situation. Calhoun left him with a coach he didn't trust and didn't want without time to find a replacement. He in effect made Ollie interim head coach without using the title.
     
  14. Waquoit

    Waquoit

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2011
    Messages:
    11,205
    Likes Received:
    7,732
    What was unfair was tying the AD's hands. If KO shows he can run a program, he'll get the job full-time.
     
  15. freescooter

    freescooter

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2011
    Messages:
    6,293
    Likes Received:
    2,113
    Moore has been a modest success at QU...got them to a couple of NITs, spit the bit twice when an NCAA bid was on the line. My point is for those who claim Calhoun is a best to select his replacement as head coach. He has never had an assistant who was a success as a head coach. Woodward, Dickerman and Moore are about the closest and they are all at what are effectively 1AA programs. given the length of his tenure, Moore is still questionable. Hobbs, and I really like Hobbs, but he flamed out at GW, Leatio was modestly successful at DePaul after failing at his alma mater, Glenn was reasonably successful in D3, had modest success at Brown and after one year flopped at Penn. So why is he suddenly omniscient when it comes to pushing one of his assistants as the next head coach? he has never hired assistants who made good head coaches. They may have been great assistant coaches, but that is a different job entirely. I expect kevin Ollie to be no different.
     
  16. Chief00

    Chief00

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    2,861
    Likes Received:
    1,388
    I agree, Warde let his ego get in the way. Poor decision.
    he
     
  17. Buzzyboy

    Buzzyboy

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,683
    Likes Received:
    1,200
    I personally think that Kevin Ollie will be successful at UConn. He's a little different than some of the other assistants mentioned in that his work ethic and his will to succeed was the major reason he was able to put together an NBA career. I think his ability to relate to these kids is important and will manifest itself in these players pushing themselves more than they ever thought they would or could. I think Warde is just protecting himself in case of a total disaster so that were Ollie's team to play listlessly and not perform to their abilities (whatever they may be) or conduct themselves like classy student athletes he would have an out. As long as Ollie manages all the aspects of the job in tying team effort, academics, and recruiting (setting up recuiting scheduling & connecting), I think he'll be extended. If UConn starts showing a lot of success both in recruiting and on the court and maybe even excedes expectations on either or both accounts, Warde's decision will be easy. I don't anticipate Kevin getting thrown to the curb unless this team is a total disaster and is not motivated in any way.
     
  18. DogMania

    DogMania

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,565
    Likes Received:
    1,701
    I'm surprised this thread has continued on. I know I'm sounding like a broken record...hum, that saying seems quite outdated...but IMO the issue isn't not giving KO a fair chance, but the impact the 7 month deal has on the overall success of the program.

    Look at it this way. Regardless to how it played out, since Manuel gave him the job, it doesn't make sense to not give him everything possible to succeed. A multi-year deal would have given KO time to succeed. By giving him a 7 month deal, it gives him very little time to prove himself with a talent depleted roster, plus potentially impact our recruit not only for KO if he's extended, but for the next guy if Manuel replaces him.

    By simply giving him a 3 to 4 year deal with a reasonable buy-out, Manuel could have presented a more supportive posture, plus made it easier for KO and his staff to sell UConn to 2013 & 14 recruits. As it stands now, any recruit that is considering UConn has to accept the risk that KO won't be here next fall. As it stand at this moment, UConn does not have a Head Coach under contract for 2013/14 season. If KO and his staff secures a commitment from XRM and some other recruits under these conditions, he deserves a ton of praise. If he doesn't land them, you can simply point the finger at Manuel and Herbst, an opinion shared by many, showed a lack of confidence in their newly appointed young coach.

    If they end up liking what KO did this upcoming season, and decide to extend a multi-year contract, there's a good chance that he has to go to battle the following season with less talent that he could have had. I hope that's not the case and that he overcomes this issue.

    I really can't see any upside to the deal he got. It's not a matter that KO deserved a multi-year contract. Yeah, I think they should have given him a bigger window to succeed or fail. I'm fine with those who believe he didn't deserve one and needs to earn it. I'm also fine with those who think he should have gotten a longer deal but think he'll be fine and will earn it. That is not the point!!! For the recruiting angle alone, what they did just doesn't make good business sense.

    It's as if two companies are competing for a contract that won't start till 8 months from now. One company tells the customer, well we have only 7 guaranteed months produce the product for you, and maybe if it goes well, we'll still be able to produce it when the contract begins, who knows? The other company says, well, we have the goods and means to produce it for the next few years. Now which decision has the better chance of keeping the buyer's job?

    Now I realize there is a valid argument that having a multi-year deal with a buy out doesn't guarantee that Ollie would not be replaced for 2013/14. But it sure makes the sales pitch a heck of a lot easier and acceptable than the alternative. No matter how much I think about this, I personally can't come up with how this was a good idea.
     
  19. upstater

    upstater

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2011
    Messages:
    19,821
    Likes Received:
    9,547
    It's funny but DePaul and GW had better seasons under Leitao and Hobbs the year before they left than they had in the prior 25 years.

    It's hard to win at some places.
     
  20. 8893

    8893 Curiouser

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2011
    Messages:
    6,398
    Likes Received:
    9,304
    And there's the rub for you, eh? Knowing what we know now, you cannot seriously claim that Manuel would have given KO a shot if JC had retired as long ago as you wanted him to go. So, if Ollie is successful, you will have to admit that you were wrong. You can equivocate and parse as much as you want, but there is no escaping the conclusion that if KO succeeds here, we owe it to JC's parting master stroke. And that kills you.

    But look on the bright side: If this plays out really well, you will have a reason to hold a silly grudge for another 30 years.
     
    SoCalCanine likes this.
Web Hosting Service by Host Duplex