Could Manuel find himself in a recruiting battle over Ollie next spring if he decides to keep him?

[freescooter]

the idea of the opening post, could UConn find itself in a bidding war for Ollie's services next Spring if they don't sign him now is just beyond crazy...I guess if UConn finishes the year unbeaten or pretty darned close to it, others might have some interest, but if this team meets expectations or exceeds them by just a little, there isn't going to be a line of suitors for a coach who hasn't really proven anything. If he takes a 17 win team and wins 18 games, Louisville isn't firing Pitino to hire Ollie...a much more likely scenario, I think is that Ollie wins 15 with a 17 win team and decides to go to the NBA as an assistant rather than "apply" for the job going forward. And for what its worth, I think 17 wins is about what I expect this year, so anything above that and he's extended, anything under that and it is dependent on lots of factors, but under 15 wins and there needs to be major extenuating circumstances for him to be here next year.

 

[selles]

I think the support for KO on this site and in general has been overwhelmingly positive. Personally, I've been a pro-KO guy since the moment he stepped back on campus and was thrilled when he got the job. But I'm also not going to go overboard in criticizing WM. Like many others, I wish he had given KO a 2- or 3-year deal with a low buyout. But I do understand his perspective even if I don't agree with it. But just like you want WM to give Ollie a real chance, I think we should give WM a real chance and not assume that he's lying when he says he wants KO to succeed.

This, a thousand times this. Well said. Reasonable minds can disagree on whether the 1 year deal was the optimal approach, but it was clearly a rational approach given KO's experience. I just don't see the basis for extrapolating from it that WM has it in for KO or wants him to fail.

If KO does a great job this year and doesn't get extended, then I'll get my pitchfork and join you guys. But there's no basis for it right now. WM deserves his chance too.

 

[upstater]

Is it hyperbolic? Yeah, but even UHart's coach spent two years as UHart's Associate Head Coach from 2006-2008, and then two more years as UPenn's Associate Head Coach (under Miller), before he became head coach there. Now, if Kevin Ollie had been from UHart, I think he would have a great chance. He's just not a big name.

I don't think the NBA people are liars. I think he will likely be a good head coach (here or elsewhere...hopefully here), and I think they were sincere. But it is still difficult to be hired by people without any track record.

I was actually referring to the NBA people who wanted to hire him (as an assistant, at least, if not a higher up position).

 

[upstater]

WM deserves his chance too.

He does? His chance at what?

 

[nomar]

He does? His chance at what?

He was responding to my post. Our point is that people should not assume that Manuel does not like Ollie and does not want him to succeed simply because Calhoun forced his hand. You (not talking to you personally) can either take him at his word, which I do, or you can choose not to. I don't understand the rationale behind not taking him at his word. Protecting yourself against potential disappointment? Looking "in the know"? I don't really understand the point of getting worked up without any evidence other than the length of the contract. IMO, people don't know enough about Manuel's character to conclude that he wants Ollie to fail. On the other hand, you don't need to know anything about Manuel to know that if Ollie succeeds, Manuel succeeds.

EDIT: I just re-read Selles's post and I'm at a loss to understand why you required any explanation. But I've written this post, so I'll leave it notwithstanding its superfluousness.

 

[Huskymaniac]

He does? His chance at what?

Doing his job maybe? You may not agree with his decisions but it is difficult to argue that his decisions, up to this point are illogical, irrational or show incompetence. CT, like every other state, is struggling financially. Any kind of a buyout on a multi-year contract, aside from an insultingly low one, would have been irresponsible give Ollie's lack of head coaching experience. You may disagree with that last statement all you want but many people in the state would have been pissed had Ollie been given such a contract and then fired due to lack of performance relative to the high expectations of this position. The number of people who would agree in the state far outnumber the number of fans, former players and other friends of Ollie who disagree.

But, again, the real issue here is the public complaining about the situation which will not be altered by said complaining. No good can come of continuing to publicly make assumptions about Manuel's lack of confidence in Ollie and/or his intentions of not giving him a real chance. But some bad can.........

It may make people feel better to express their angry among like-minded people but what's the point of doing so if the situation will remain the same after doing so and now you are just pissed off and, maybe, your public outcry has weakened the program?

 

[8893]

We managed to get recruits to come with JC wavering for the last 2 years. KO can get recruits to come by looking them in the eyes and saying, "I'll be here." Yes, of course other coaches will point out that KO can get fired. Leonard Hamilton certainly knows what it's like to be on the hot seat.

Missed this part the first time. Sorry. I know I said I was done, but this part hits so precisely at the problem imo.

If we know anything about KO and his attributes that others (including recruits and their families) regard so highly, it's that honesty and integrity are paramount among them. In this exact situation, these great attributes now operate as KO's greatest weakness. I could not disagree more strongly with the bolded part of your statement. KO cannot say that because it is not true, and I simply don't believe that he lies or even misleads. He doesn't control it, and he has been given no assurance that that's the case. So, when a top recruit and his parents look KO in the eye, trusting him with the biggest decision in their lives to date, I absolutely do not believe that he tells them "I'll be here." And therein lies the problem imo. I'm sure he's got all sorts of other responses, like "I'm acting like I'll be here, because that's what I believe," and other variations on that same theme. But you know as well as I do that one precise question like "What have you been told about whether you will be extended?" or "Do you have any assurance from the administration that you will be extended?" can easily reveal the lack of any assurance whatsoever.

I don't see it as akin to the JC situation at all. JC controlled his own destiny. If he gave a promise to a recruit and his family, you can be damn sure it was because he could deliver on it. And he did. I don't think KO is about to ruin his word to get recruits in the door. He knows he's got a long career ahead of him--here or elsewhere--and he's not about to tarnish his reputation or change who he is at his core. That is what will ultimately serve him well. The question is where.

And to your other points, I don't infer anything evil about Manuel's decision on the seven-month contract. I just think it showed his own inexperience, poor judgment and lack of confidence. As I've said from the start, it was simply bush-league imo, but not motivated by any dislike of Kevin.

 

[nomar]

Well, we'll agree to disagree. We must have watched a different press conference, because the Kevin Ollie I saw will have no problem saying to a recruit: "Together, we will succeed at UConn." (Perhaps "I'll be here" is too strong. I suppose "I believe I will be here" is more what I actually meant.)

I get your point; I just totally disagree that with the notion that KO will be tongue-tied and unable to project confidence in himself, because I don't think he sees the uncertainty that you see. I'm not Kevin Ollie. I didn't claw my way through 13 NBA seasons and I'm not a God-fearing man. So maybe I'd hold back some. KO won't.

 

[8893]

Well, we'll agree to disagree. We must have watched a different press conference, because the Kevin Ollie I saw will have no problem saying to a recruit: "Together, we will succeed at UConn." (Perhaps "I'll be here" is too strong. I suppose "I believe I will be here" is more what I actually meant.)

I get your point; I just totally disagree that with the notion that KO will be tongue-tied and unable to project confidence in himself, because I don't think he sees the uncertainty that you see. I'm not Kevin Ollie. I didn't claw my way through 13 NBA seasons and I'm not a God-fearing man. So maybe I'd hold back some. KO won't.

I saw the same press conference. There is a material difference between what you said the first time and what you meant, and you know it, Nomar. C'mon man, we live on words. They matter.

I don't think it affects Kevin and his confidence in himself. I think it affects recruits and their families. The fact of the uncertainty is unavoidable (yes, everything is uncertain--I get that; having no contract and no assurance makes any statement to the contrary patently false though).

Put yourself in their shoes, or imagine they have come to you for advice. Would you tell them to bet the most important decision in their lives to date on it? Would you tell them that they shouldn't even consider the uncertainty to be a negative factor? Because that's all I'm hearing from everyone here; i.e., that it shouldn't be a factor and KO should be able to overcome it if he's good enough. That's the premise that I reject. It's a significant handicap imo.

 

[nomar]

"There is a material difference between what you said the first time and what you meant, and you know it, Nomar."

I'd actually say it's immaterial, since my clarification (of a guess as to how he might phrase something) didn't affect either of our positions. My point was that he will project confidence that he will be here in the 2013-2014 season.

Of course some recruits will be wary. At the end of the day, no matter whether he has a 7-month contract or a 3-year contract, Kevin Ollie is a 39-year-old first-time head coach. Recruits and their families are going to have put faith in him. And I believe that he will convince some of them to do that even with a 7-month (for now) contract. KO's contract status is less of a concern than his inexperience and the program's present state, IMO.

Again, I'll reiterate that I understand where you're coming from. I just see it differently.

 

[huskiesnyc]

KO's dream job is UConn and he has it. He is not going anywhere

 

[upstater]

He was responding to my post. Our point is that people should not assume that Manuel does not like Ollie and does not want him to succeed simply because Calhoun forced his hand. You (not talking to you personally) can either take him at his word, which I do, or you can choose not to. I don't understand the rationale behind not taking him at his word. Protecting yourself against potential disappointment? Looking "in the know"? I don't really understand the point of getting worked up without any evidence other than the length of the contract. IMO, people don't know enough about Manuel's character to conclude that he wants Ollie to fail. On the other hand, you don't need to know anything about Manuel to know that if Ollie succeeds, Manuel succeeds.

EDIT: I just re-read Selles's post and I'm at a loss to understand why you required any explanation. But I've written this post, so I'll leave it notwithstanding its superfluousness.

I already responded above that I think the idea of Manuel wanting him to fail is ludicrous. I've kept to the question of the contract solely from the very beginning. But that includes criticism of Manuel at the PC as well. What I don't understand is this idea that Manuel needs to show that he can run a search. Why? That's why I responded to Selles. At least I think that's what he was referring to. Besides, Manuel is going to show that skill soon with regard to football anyway.

 

[upstater]

Doing his job maybe? You may not agree with his decisions but it is difficult to argue that his decisions, up to this point are illogical, irrational or show incompetence. CT, like every other state, is struggling financially. Any kind of a buyout on a multi-year contract, aside from an insultingly low one, would have been irresponsible give Ollie's lack of head coaching experience. You may disagree with that last statement all you want but many people in the state would have been pissed had Ollie been given such a contract and then fired due to lack of performance relative to the high expectations of this position. The number of people who would agree in the state far outnumber the number of fans, former players and other friends of Ollie who disagree.

But, again, the real issue here is the public complaining about the situation which will not be altered by said complaining. No good can come of continuing to publicly make assumptions about Manuel's lack of confidence in Ollie and/or his intentions of not giving him a real chance. But some bad can.........

It may make people feel better to express their angry among like-minded people but what's the point of doing so if the situation will remain the same after doing so and now you are just pissed off and, maybe, your public outcry has weakened the program?

If people are concerned about money, they should seriously end the programs at UConn. Since when are such decisions made according to the number of people who agree or disagree with a 3 year Ollie contract? I thought UConn sports was a wing of the school meant to market the school. Is that not the case? When you're putting $100 million behind the rent, another $100 million in facilities for bball and football, this is no joke. This is precisely why you try not to be penny-smart and pound-foolish.

 

[nomar]

What I don't understand is this idea that Manuel needs to show that he can run a search. Why? That's why I responded to Selles. At least I think that's what he was referring to. Besides, Manuel is going to show that skill soon with regard to football anyway.

Oh I don't think that's what he meant. And yeah, he is.

 

[HuskyHawk]

If people are concerned about money, they should seriously end the programs at UConn. Since when are such decisions made according to the number of people who agree or disagree with a 3 year Ollie contract? I thought UConn sports was a wing of the school meant to market the school. Is that not the case? When you're putting $100 million behind the rent, another $100 million in facilities for bball and football, this is no joke. This is precisely why you try not to be penny-smart and pound-foolish.

If that's the argument, then they shouldn't have hired him at all. Announce Blaney or Hobbs as interim until the spring and bring in a big name.

It's pretty simple. Because JC retired late, there was no coach the the school could have hired that it would be comfortable hiring on more than a 7 month basis. Nobody. Therefore the recruiting challenge for this next few months is inevitable and unavoidable. A long term contract was not happening. That is Calhoun's fault if anybody's.

So we should ignore the contract and focus on the man they chose. Instead of the wimpy safe play with Hobbs or Blaney, they made the bold choice with the unproven guy with great potential. I applaud the move. It was not certain that they would even do that, especially with the ban.

 

[upstater]

If that's the argument, then they shouldn't have hired him at all. Announce Blaney or Hobbs as interim until the spring and bring in a big name.

It's pretty simple. Because JC retired late, there was no coach the the school could have hired that it would be comfortable hiring on more than a 7 month basis. Nobody. Therefore the recruiting challenge for this next few months is inevitable and unavoidable. A long term contract was not happening. That is Calhoun's fault if anybody's.

So we should ignore the contract and focus on the man they chose. Instead of the wimpy safe play with Hobbs or Blaney, they made the bold choice with the unproven guy with great potential. I applaud the move. It was not certain that they would even do that, especially with the ban.

What big name?

You're all over the place in this latest post.

Ollie has certain intangibles that Shaka Smart (a big name I guess) doesn't. And I've listed those before, you know I have. It makes sense to swing for the fences if you're UConn.

 

[selles]

Oh I don't think that's what he meant. And yeah, he is.

That's correct, it's not what I meant at all. As I indicated in the prior post, if KO does a great job and WM doesn't extend him, I'll be elbowing people out of the way to express my moral indignation through vehement (but eloquent!) internet message board posts. Given the program equity that will pass from Calhoun to Ollie (but not to anyone else), I think it would be crazy to pass on KO if he proves himself a capable coach this year. If WM were to do that, it would be strong evidence that he's making it about his own ego rather than the good of the program, and that would be a problem.

But for now, given KO's lack of experience there's a very logical basis for not giving him a multiyear deal. I'm willing to give WM the benefit of the doubt that logic is underlying his approach rather than ego. Maybe the short contract will hurt us for 1 year in recruting - though I think that's very, very, very speculative - but it's a lot easier not to renew than to fire and I think a guy who will be a good AD could make the choice WM has here. So I say let's wait and see, and let's give WM a chance to prove that he's a good at his job.

We've talked this one to death, fellas. For several weeks, over multiple threads. To echo some sentiments from early in this thread, I can't wait for the season to start so we can argue about whether Tolksdorf should have taken that 3 when we were up 50 over Michigan State.