Coach Hurley compared to "the greats" | The Boneyard

Coach Hurley compared to "the greats"

McLovin

McLovin

Gangstas, what's up?
Joined
Dec 3, 2018
Messages
2,954
Reaction Score
18,698
There has been a lot of doom and gloom on here after the Creighton loss. A lot of criticism of our head man, Dan Hurley. While he obviously has room to improve himself as a coach, especially in game adjustments, we need to realize we have something special here and may need to give him time (lots of it) if we want to see him be great at UConn. He has only 10 years as a D1 head coach and this is his first season coaching at the "high major" level.

Here is how long it took some of the NCAA modern-era greats at high major programs to win their first titles.

Jim Calhoun: 27 years as a head coach (13 years at UConn)
Coach K: 16 years as head coach (11 years at Duke)
Roy Williams: 13 years as head coach (13 years at Kansas/UNC)
Jay Wright: 22 years as head coach (15 years at Nova)
Billy Donovan: 12 years as head coach (10 years at Florida)
Jim Boeheim: 27 years as head coach (his one and only title, probably ever)
Bill Self: 15 years as head coach (8 years at Illinois/Kansas)

Dan Hurley: 10 years as head coach (3rd year at UConn, 1st in the Big East)

He is no doubt the right guy to return this program to glory. The culture he is focused on building and his winning attitude are coaching intangibles second to none. Just like the student-athletes he is coaching, his skills on the sideline will improve over time as he continues to face better competition on a regular basis. I'm hoping it is sooner than a decade until we get our next title, but if history is any indicator we may need to be patient. But we will no doubt have a great ride back to the top regardless of how long it takes.
 
I think he is probably our best man for the job as well, but it's pretty ridiculous to think there aren't any doubts about his potential. In my mind, right now he's a high floor, medium-ceiling kind of coach unless he figures out how to coach both sides of the ball well.

We can make fun of it all we want in the bad-takes thread, but his offensive philosophy for the last 10 years has left something significant to be desired. Our team is going to look better when we can put 3 or more shooters on the floor in the coming years, but the lack of movement and inability to adjust at halftime is concerning. The 1-6 record in overtime is more concerning. We don't have an offensive identity other than generating turnovers and relying on transcendent offensive talent.

I'm okay with the reliance on experienced players over freshman, and I think his substitution patterns are making more sense as time goes on. I'll even give a pass on the bad sense of when to call timeouts because he might just be purposefully getting them to play through things.

I think what he brings defensively as a coach--selling out to defend the 3 and attacking ball screens is great. Defensively, our team is trending in the right direction, and with Samson/Hawkins coming in and Akok/Jackson on the roster, we're even starting to recruit for our system specifically. I'd assume our defense on KenPom or wherever is probably meh right now because of the rocky early games and a few players who are less than stellar on D by nature, but systematically it makes sense and works.

Our recruiting has been great. Personality/team management is great. I think he has put together a solid staff. Practices from what I saw are really well-organized. He's doing a good job connecting with the media and fans. We're really talking about one or two weaknesses that can be fixed if he's willing to be flexible.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, but

usatsi_7859284.jpg
 
There is no perfect coach. I like hurley and will pull for him. I think he will keep improving as he goes along.
 
.-.
McLovin said:
There has been a lot of doom and gloom on here after the Creighton loss. A lot of criticism of our head man, Dan Hurley. While he obviously has room to improve himself as a coach, especially in game adjustments, we need to realize we have something special here and may need to give him time (lots of it) if we want to see him be great at UConn. He has only 10 years as a D1 head coach and this is his first season coaching at the "high major" level.

Here is how long it took some of the NCAA modern-era greats at high major programs to win their first titles.

Jim Calhoun: 27 years as a head coach (13 years at UConn)
Coach K: 16 years as head coach (11 years at Duke)
Roy Williams: 13 years as head coach (13 years at Kansas/UNC)
Jay Wright: 22 years as head coach (15 years at Nova)
Billy Donovan: 12 years as head coach (10 years at Florida)
Jim Boeheim: 27 years as head coach (his one and only title, probably ever)
Bill Self: 15 years as head coach (8 years at Illinois/Kansas)

Dan Hurley: 10 years as head coach (3rd year at UConn, 1st in the Big East)

He is no doubt the right guy to return this program to glory. The culture he is focused on building and his winning attitude are coaching intangibles second to none. Just like the student-athletes he is coaching, his skills on the sideline will improve over time as he continues to face better competition on a regular basis. I'm hoping it is sooner than a decade until we get our next title, but if history is any indicator we may need to be patient. But we will no doubt have a great ride back to the top regardless of how long it takes.
Expand ...
Its tough to seriously complain. Our program seems to be on an upward trajectory. Turnovers are a under control. We don't get absolutely abused on the boards night-in and night-out. Our ability to recruit size had decayed to classic small school levels. Our recruiting of bigs has improved. The most fundamental issues under KO seem to be corrected. So that's cool.

Is Hurley the guy to win us three NCs? That remains to be seen. That guy is tough to find.

That said, some of the issues at the end of KO era were so bad. The quality of our bigs. The high numbers of turnovers. There was/is a dozen or more coaches that would easily correct such fundamental issues.
 
8893 said:
I think it is increasingly unlikely that we will ever see a coach win three NCs at the same school again.
Expand ...
Yeah. Considering there are only a few in the history of NCAA basketball, I think it's always been difficult. Jay Wright is likely to be added. Self, Calipari... maybe even Izzo could make it. But maybe none of them.
 
NDakotaHusky said:
Yeah. Considering there are only a few in the history of NCAA basketball, I think it's always been difficult. Jay Wright is likely to be added. Self, Calipari... maybe even Izzo could make it. But maybe none of them.
Expand ...
Oh I think there is a good chance of those who already have couple in the bank getting another one; my point was whether we will ever see a coach who currently has none (e.g., Hurley) win three at the same school. I think that's increasingly unlikely, given the shorter tenures of both great college players and great college coaches. More great players leave earlier now; and few people stay at the same jobs for ten or more years like they used to.
 
8893 said:
Oh I think there is a good chance of those who already have couple in the bank getting another one; my point was whether we will ever see a coach who currently has none (e.g., Hurley) win three at the same school. I think that's increasingly unlikely, given the shorter tenures of both great college players and great college coaches. More great players leave earlier now; and few people stay at the same jobs for ten or more years like they used to.
Expand ...
I think whoever coaches at UNC, Duke, Kansas and Kentucky will always have a chance. They spend so much $$ on salaries, facilities.... the players.

Anyone who sticks around 20 years at any of those places has a chance.

So the question becomes, will they stick around 20 years? That was part of your point. I think someone will. Those schools pay a lot for winning coaches.
 
Hi-Low said:
Jay Wright
Expand ...
8893 said:
Oh I think there is a good chance of those who already have couple in the bank getting another one; my point was whether we will ever see a coach who currently has none (e.g., Hurley) win three at the same school. I think that's increasingly unlikely, given the shorter tenures of both great college players and great college coaches. More great players leave earlier now; and few people stay at the same jobs for ten or more years like they used to.
Expand ...
 
.-.
8893 said:
I think it is increasingly unlikely that we will ever see a coach win three NCs at the same school again.
Expand ...
Wright will probably as others mentioned. I think it will happen with others, you get on a roll in the right place it can happen quickly.
 
husky429 said:
We can make fun of it all we want in the bad-takes thread, but his offensive philosophy for the last 10 years has left something significant to be desired.
Expand ...
You're not wrong but you have to take into account the schools that he's been at and the level of players he had access to. Those took a big leap up when he came to UConn and again when UConn joined the Big East. It will take some time for him to figure it out.
 
Hi-Low said:
Wright will probably as others mentioned. I think it will happen with others, you get on a roll in the right place it can happen quickly.
Expand ...
Again, I was talking about someone who currently has none, like Hurley, staying somewhere long enough to win three. Not someone like Wright or the others who already have a couple.

I'm not saying it's impossible; just less likely than it used to be--and it wasn't ever all that likely to begin with.
 
NDakotaHusky said:
I think whoever coaches at UNC, Duke, Kansas and Kentucky will always have a chance. They spend so much $$ on salaries, facilities.... the players.

Anyone who sticks around 20 years at any of those places has a chance.

So the question becomes, will they stick around 20 years? That was part of your point. I think someone will. Those schools pay a lot for winning coaches.
Expand ...
I agree that coaching at the above schools always gives a coach a chance with all the factors you mentioned.

Maybe Chris Beard, can or will, at Texas Tech. He is young at 47, came close in 2019, gets paid $4.575M a year. Took a program that was second tier in his conference and has them up there. Though, if K retires at Duke, he might wind up there.

What about Bennett at UVA? Young guy, won one already, gets good recruits albeit some are deterred by the deliberate style of play.

None yet for Few, but not impossible.
 
He’s exactly what we needed a high energy hyper competitive guy with top notch communication and program management skills. I wouldn’t call him great yet. He needs to beat more quality opponents, particularly on the road, and do something in the tournament.
 
.-.
To clarify, my point of posting this wasn't to imply he is great or to imply that he is guaranteed to be a great.

It was simply to show that in-order for him to bring the program back to winning titles, he (obviously) still has a lot of growing to do as a coach but it also may take him some time to get there based on how long it took the other "great" coaches to reach that point.

Really just trying to give us a frame of reference on where he is in his career progression compared to others who have reached an elite level, like we all hope he can eventually do here at UConn.

Also a few other names I left off the list mentioned in this thread, figured I'd add them here below.

Tom Izzo, 5 years as a head coach to win his first (and only) title. He was an assistant at MSU for 12 years prior.
Tony Bennett, 13 years as a head coach to win his first (and only) title
John Callipari, 20 years as a head coach to win his first (and only)
Mark Few, 21 years as a head coach and still has not won a title

Steve Fisher (1989) Tom Izzo (2000) and Kevin Ollie (2014) are the only modern era coaches to ever win a title with less than 10 years of head coaching experience.
 
If you are a defense of minded coach and that is the type of player you recruit you end up with this inferior half court offense. Always in the game but unable to win a high number.
 
McLovin said:
To clarify, my point of posting this wasn't to imply he is great or to imply that he is guaranteed to be a great.

It was simply to show that in-order for him to bring the program back to winning titles, he (obviously) still has a lot of growing to do as a coach but it also may take him some time to get there based on how long it took the other "great" coaches to reach that point.

Really just trying to give us a frame of reference on where he is in his career progression compared to others who have reached an elite level, like we all hope he can eventually do here at UConn.

Also a few other names I left off the list mentioned in this thread, figured I'd add them here below.

Tom Izzo, 5 years as a head coach to win his first (and only) title. He was an assistant at MSU for 12 years prior.
Tony Bennett, 13 years as a head coach to win his first (and only) title
John Callipari, 20 years as a head coach to win his first (and only)
Mark Few, 21 years as a head coach and still has not won a title

Steve Fisher (1989) Tom Izzo (2000) and Kevin Ollie (2014) are the only modern era coaches to ever win a title with less than 10 years of head coaching experience.
Expand ...
Valvano?
 
.-.
He’s the right guy but we need some good game situation minds on the bench to collaborate in crunch time, but no coach can overcome missed free throws.
 
8893 said:
I think it is increasingly unlikely that we will ever see a coach win three NCs at the same school again.
Expand ...
Jay Wright has a better than 50/50 chance
Hurley won't be as successful as most here feel he will be if he doesn't learn how to instill an effective offensive scheme and stick to it. He can recruit all the 4 and 5 star guys in the world but unless you give them the opportunities to play with an effective flow while possessing the ball - all we are going to see is a bunch of street ballers standing around. Ben G, Rip, Rashad, Ray, Caron - they all moved without the ball and created multiple options on each possession. We haven't seen that at UConn in a long time. Giffs and Jeremy showed some of that movement but KO's and Dan Hurley's teams have mostly been lacking an effective offense - and both were PGs which blows my mind.
Dan Hurley is a really good recruiter and he will bring in the ballers but without a plan he won't get the best results out of them scoring the ball. Defense is important but only 50% of the game.
 
gtcam said:
Jay Wright has a better than 50/50 chance
Hurley won't be as successful as most here feel he will be if he doesn't learn how to instill an effective offensive scheme and stick to it. He can recruit all the 4 and 5 star guys in the world but unless you give them the opportunities to play with an effective flow while possessing the ball - all we are going to see is a bunch of street ballers standing around. Ben G, Rip, Rashad, Ray, Caron - they all moved without the ball and created multiple options on each possession. We haven't seen that at UConn in a long time. Giffs and Jeremy showed some of that movement but KO's and Dan Hurley's teams have mostly been lacking an effective offense - and both were PGs which blows my mind.
Dan Hurley is a really good recruiter and he will bring in the ballers but without a plan he won't get the best results out of them scoring the ball. Defense is important but only 50% of the game.
Expand ...
Rip never stopped moving, but besides Bouk we don’t have anyone else who comes off screens to shoot. Even Polley is a spot up shooter.
 
McLovin said:
To clarify, my point of posting this wasn't to imply he is great or to imply that he is guaranteed to be a great.

It was simply to show that in-order for him to bring the program back to winning titles, he (obviously) still has a lot of growing to do as a coach but it also may take him some time to get there based on how long it took the other "great" coaches to reach that point.

Really just trying to give us a frame of reference on where he is in his career progression compared to others who have reached an elite level, like we all hope he can eventually do here at UConn.

Also a few other names I left off the list mentioned in this thread, figured I'd add them here below.

Tom Izzo, 5 years as a head coach to win his first (and only) title. He was an assistant at MSU for 12 years prior.
Tony Bennett, 13 years as a head coach to win his first (and only) title
John Callipari, 20 years as a head coach to win his first (and only)
Mark Few, 21 years as a head coach and still has not won a title

Steve Fisher (1989) Tom Izzo (2000) and Kevin Ollie (2014) are the only modern era coaches to ever win a title with less than 10 years of head coaching experience.
Expand ...
I got your point
I'll take Izzo, Bennett, Few as my coach any day of the week and all those guys and others have coached at the highest level in their 1st 10 years as a HC. Dan Hurley at Wagner and URI
You can be a great coach and not win a bunch of titles
Thats what makes a very few guys like Calhoun to be above great - I dont see Dan Hurley or 99% of coaches reaching that level but while he's at UConn I would love to see him come close!
 
McLovin said:
There has been a lot of doom and gloom on here after the Creighton loss. A lot of criticism of our head man, Dan Hurley. While he obviously has room to improve himself as a coach, especially in game adjustments, we need to realize we have something special here and may need to give him time (lots of it) if we want to see him be great at UConn. He has only 10 years as a D1 head coach and this is his first season coaching at the "high major" level.

Here is how long it took some of the NCAA modern-era greats at high major programs to win their first titles.

Jim Calhoun: 27 years as a head coach (13 years at UConn)
Coach K: 16 years as head coach (11 years at Duke)
Roy Williams: 13 years as head coach (13 years at Kansas/UNC)
Jay Wright: 22 years as head coach (15 years at Nova)
Billy Donovan: 12 years as head coach (10 years at Florida)
Jim Boeheim: 27 years as head coach (his one and only title, probably ever)
Bill Self: 15 years as head coach (8 years at Illinois/Kansas)

Dan Hurley: 10 years as head coach (3rd year at UConn, 1st in the Big East)

He is no doubt the right guy to return this program to glory. The culture he is focused on building and his winning attitude are coaching intangibles second to none. Just like the student-athletes he is coaching, his skills on the sideline will improve over time as he continues to face better competition on a regular basis. I'm hoping it is sooner than a decade until we get our next title, but if history is any indicator we may need to be patient. But we will no doubt have a great ride back to the top regardless of how long it takes.
Expand ...
Yeah. You obviously know nothing about most of these guys. Calhoun took over a D2 program at Northeastern and moved to D1. Got to the tournament in his 2nd year of eligibility. He won 3 national championships and an NIT. At this point Hurley doesn’t deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence never mind compared as a coach
 
Hurley looks to me at this point like a very good recruiter, average coach. He could improve over time. But if I were betting, my bet would be that he is much closer to Mark Gottfried than Roy Williams Mike Krzysewski or Jim Calhoun. Hope I’m wrong but those guys can, as the saying goes, take yourn and beat theirn and take theirn and beat yourn. Hurley couldn’t beat Creighton.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,529
Messages
4,580,600
Members
10,491
Latest member
7774Forever


Top Bottom