Goodman: Hurley to UConn (not official)

[the Q]

At the end of the day, If we ended up with Nate Oats, I wouldn't be sad. I'm going to be worried no matter who it is. I'd be even more uneasy about the prospects of him running a college program, simply because of the lack of track record. But when it comes down to it, I know he can coach. I read that Bobby Hurley was recruiting one of Nate's players at Romulus and ended up being so impressed with his coaching that he offered him an assistant gig when Bobby took over Buffalo. So Nate definitely has something.

Agreed.

And this year Oats landed 2 guys who were 4* by ESPN in Segu and Jeenathan Williams. So now he's showing he can recruit a bit.

He could easily be next year's Hurley.

 

[Uconnfanatic]

Benedict knows everyone who is a possibility and he has been doing his homework from whenever it was he knew he was going to fire Ollie. Benedict is not an idiot.
UConn is still a major brand and Benedict should hire the coach he thinks will do the best job. Basketball is too important to the UConn in many ways to hire some bargain basement coach. Right now Hurley appears to be the guy but he is going to get market value.

I never said take a lesser coach. I am just not convinced that Hurley is a better coach than some of the other possibilities. There is more to evaluating a coach besides the past year's won lost record. if Danny Hurley was head & shoulders better than other candidates then sure it might make sense to pay up but I'm not sure that's the case. I won't be at all surprised if one or two or three of the other candidates end up being at least as good or better. People tend to lock in on one guy as if he's the one we have to have. Hurley is certainly the popular choice. Let's not forget it was only a a few short years ago that many on here wanted to pay whatever we had to to make sure ollie stayed and didn't go to the NBA.

 

[intlzncster]

What makes Hurley so appealing are three things:

1. He has a track-record as a head coach. URI have gotten progressively better, but he's shown he can have guys graduate and/or get hurt and still produce a winning team. He's not a "got lucky with one group of recruits and rode them to a few good years" coach. There's a level of certainty there that doesn't exist with most of the other guys being rumored.

2. He has a track-record as a program re-builder. He turned Wagner around in two years and turned URI around in three.

3. He has a track-record as a recruiter. Dude's not Calipari, but he's won his share of 4-star recruits and has recruited in the Big East before. He won't be out of place going after the types of guys that we want.

Is it a guarantee that we get him, or that he's the right pick? Nope. But he checks more boxes than any other realistic candidate, balancing certainty (the guy can clearly coach and recruit) and upside (he's at a stage where his best years are probably ahead of him).

I also like that his guys don't transfer. I want some stability back in the program, and hopefully he brings that with him.

Another of couple small additions:

He also built St Benedict's Prep into a machine. Lost only 21 games in nine years. I think there's value in having been a high school coach in terms of understanding and relating to young guys. That probably serves him well in both recruiting and developing guys.

Shouldn't discount the fact that he has the Hurley name. One, because it resonates in the basketball community and two, because he and Bobby learned from one of the best, and it's showing.

What stands out for me in hearing him talk, watching him coach, and from everything I've read, is that the guy is passionate as hell. There's no doubt in my mind he'll die trying at UCONN. And his players run through walls for him. I love that.

A part of this is looking for qualities in guys, not simply track record. When a lot of us talk about JC's greatest skill, we mention his ability to impose his will on his players and have it show on the court. It's that intangible. Danny's passion and drive, his willingness to learn, relatability, maturity, etc tick a lot of boxes as well.

 

[BlueMAB]

State institutions should not be allowed to be reckless with taxpayers. money, especially in a state as broke as Connecticut. It is not like Hurley stands head & shoulders above other alternatives. Hopefully DB learned a lesson with Ollie's contract the need to negotiate well and not overpay but I don't have a lot of confidence given this administration's track record. $1.5 million or move on to other candidates. I bet Otzelberger or Konkol would be excited to sign a $1 million contract and either one might prove to be a better choice in the long-term. Hurley is the most obvious choice but not necessarily the best choice.

The state budget is $3.5 billion.

if this is correct:

According the State of CT Transparency website, his 2016-2917 salary from taxpayer monies was $342k including fringe benefits. The remainder is from funds generated from fundraising efforts by the UConn Foundation.

Then the taxpayer's portion of Kevin Ollie's yearly salary was .0093% of the budget.

Even if the taxpayer's paid the whole salary (and we don't) it's .086% of the budget.

The full $10 million buyout is .29% of the state budget.

If Hurley is the guy, then you pay him. Taking a risk on a coach without a proven record because you can get him for $2M instead of $3M thereby saving the state between .0029%(taxpayers pay $250k instead of $350k) and .029% ($2M vs. $3M) is immensely shortsighted when you consider the revenues a winning coach can bring in with NCAA appearances, and tournament championships, etc.

Penny-wise and pound-foolish.

Could another coach do the same or better than Hurley? Yes. Is it worth the risk (if after your evaluation you think Hurley is the best fit for the position). Not in a million years. Not if you're doing it because you're worried about the taxpayers. You're talking about a fraction of a percent of the overall budget in a state that requires so much administrative spending we can't afford to fund the pensions we've committed to.

Argue for someone else because you think he's a better coach, if you're concerned about wasting taxpayer's money, write your legislators. They're the ones wasting our money.

 

[intlzncster]

Argue for someone else because you think he's a better coach, if you're concerned about wasting taxpayer's money, write your legislators. They're the ones wasting our money.

This. Should be best coach available based on whatever metrics you want to use. Dunno what those will be for Benedict. Then you do what you have to to lock him up.

If UCONN basketball becomes successful, that success will reap financial rewards that will make up for the extra 500k-1m you spend per year on the coach. And who knows, having a successful BB program might help with a P5 invite eventually. Certainly can't hurt.

 

[Uconnfanatic]

The state budget is $3.5 billion.

if this is correct:


Then the taxpayer's portion of Kevin Ollie's yearly salary was .0093% of the budget.

Even if the taxpayer's paid the whole salary (and we don't) it's .086% of the budget.

The full $10 million buyout is .29% of the state budget.

If Hurley is the guy, then you pay him. Taking a risk on a coach without a proven record because you can get him for $2M instead of $3M thereby saving the state between .0029%(taxpayers pay $250k instead of $350k) and .029% ($2M vs. $3M) is immensely shortsighted when you consider the revenues a winning coach can bring in with NCAA appearances, and tournament championships, etc.

Penny-wise and pound-foolish.

Could another coach do the same or better than Hurley? Yes. Is it worth the risk (if after your evaluation you think Hurley is the best fit for the position). Not in a million years. Not if you're doing it because you're worried about the taxpayers. You're talking about a fraction of a percent of the overall budget in a state that requires so much administrative spending we can't afford to fund the pensions we've committed to.

Argue for someone else because you think he's a better coach, if you're concerned about wasting taxpayer's money, write your legislators. They're the ones wasting our money.

 

[Son of Robert]

Another of couple small additions:

He also built St Benedict's Prep into a machine. Lost only 21 games in nine years. I think there's value in having been a high school coach in terms of understanding and relating to young guys. That probably serves him well in both recruiting and developing guys.

Shouldn't discount the fact that he has the Hurley name. One, because it resonates in the basketball community and two, because he and Bobby learned from one of the best, and it's showing.

What stands out for me in hearing him talk, watching him coach, and from everything I've read, is that the guy is passionate as hell. There's no doubt in my mind he'll die trying at UCONN. And his players run through walls for him. I love that.

A part of this is looking for qualities in guys, not simply track record. When a lot of us talk about JC's greatest skill, we mention his ability to impose his will on his players and have it show on the court. It's that intangible. Danny's passion and drive, his willingness to learn, relatability, maturity, etc tick a lot of boxes as well.

Great post intlzncster.

Hurley appears to have the power to motivate his players which is just so crucial, for morale, for chemistry, for effort, for toughness. This wins games.

There is a coaching bloodline here that maybe should not be underestimated seeing as how all three Hurleys have proven themselves as very successful coaches.

 

[fatlucy]

The state budget is $3.5 billion.

if this is correct:


Then the taxpayer's portion of Kevin Ollie's yearly salary was .0093% of the budget.

Even if the taxpayer's paid the whole salary (and we don't) it's .086% of the budget.

The full $10 million buyout is .29% of the state budget.

If Hurley is the guy, then you pay him. Taking a risk on a coach without a proven record because you can get him for $2M instead of $3M thereby saving the state between .0029%(taxpayers pay $250k instead of $350k) and .029% ($2M vs. $3M) is immensely shortsighted when you consider the revenues a winning coach can bring in with NCAA appearances, and tournament championships, etc.

Penny-wise and pound-foolish.

Could another coach do the same or better than Hurley? Yes. Is it worth the risk (if after your evaluation you think Hurley is the best fit for the position). Not in a million years. Not if you're doing it because you're worried about the taxpayers. You're talking about a fraction of a percent of the overall budget in a state that requires so much administrative spending we can't afford to fund the pensions we've committed to.

Argue for someone else because you think he's a better coach, if you're concerned about wasting taxpayer's money, write your legislators. They're the ones wasting our money.

How many times can I like this?

 

[Flahuskie]

How would you like to be players for URI trying to get ready for your first NCAA tournament and reading that your Coach is gone??

 

[gampelcrazies]

How would you like to be players for URI trying to get ready for your first NCAA tournament and reading that your Coach is gone??

It's part of the game

 

[GemParty]

How would you like to be players for URI trying to get ready for your first NCAA tournament and reading that your Coach is gone??

Did it bother UCF vs Auburn in football?

 

[JMick]

How would you like to be players for URI trying to get ready for your first NCAA tournament and reading that your Coach is gone??

It sucks but I feel like a lot of players get it. They have a lot of upper class men so it will probably bother them less than if he had a younger team

 

[Uconnfanatic]

The state budget is $3.5 billion.

if this is correct:


Then the taxpayer's portion of Kevin Ollie's yearly salary was .0093% of the budget.

Even if the taxpayer's paid the whole salary (and we don't) it's .086% of the budget.

The full $10 million buyout is .29% of the state budget.

If Hurley is the guy, then you pay him. Taking a risk on a coach without a proven record because you can get him for $2M instead of $3M thereby saving the state between .0029%(taxpayers pay $250k instead of $350k) and .029% ($2M vs. $3M) is immensely shortsighted when you consider the revenues a winning coach can bring in with NCAA appearances, and tournament championships, etc.

Penny-wise and pound-foolish.

Could another coach do the same or better than Hurley? Yes. Is it worth the risk (if after your evaluation you think Hurley is the best fit for the position). Not in a million years. Not if you're doing it because you're worried about the taxpayers. You're talking about a fraction of a percent of the overall budget in a state that requires so much administrative spending we can't afford to fund the pensions we've committed to.

Argue for someone else because you think he's a better coach, if you're concerned about wasting taxpayer's money, write your legislators. They're the ones wasting our money.

Always tough to

The state budget is $3.5 billion.

if this is correct:


Then the taxpayer's portion of Kevin Ollie's yearly salary was .0093% of the budget.

Even if the taxpayer's paid the whole salary (and we don't) it's .086% of the budget.

The full $10 million buyout is .29% of the state budget.

If Hurley is the guy, then you pay him. Taking a risk on a coach without a proven record because you can get him for $2M instead of $3M thereby saving the state between .0029%(taxpayers pay $250k instead of $350k) and .029% ($2M vs. $3M) is immensely shortsighted when you consider the revenues a winning coach can bring in with NCAA appearances, and tournament championships, etc.

Penny-wise and pound-foolish.

Could another coach do the same or better than Hurley? Yes. Is it worth the risk (if after your evaluation you think Hurley is the best fit for the position). Not in a million years. Not if you're doing it because you're worried about the taxpayers. You're talking about a fraction of a percent of the overall budget in a state that requires so much administrative spending we can't afford to fund the pensions we've committed to.

Argue for someone else because you think he's a better coach, if you're concerned about wasting taxpayer's money, write your legislators. They're the ones wasting our money.

The state budget is $3.5 billion.

if this is correct:


Then the taxpayer's portion of Kevin Ollie's yearly salary was .0093% of the budget.

Even if the taxpayer's paid the whole salary (and we don't) it's .086% of the budget.

The full $10 million buyout is .29% of the state budget.

If Hurley is the guy, then you pay him. Taking a risk on a coach without a proven record because you can get him for $2M instead of $3M thereby saving the state between .0029%(taxpayers pay $250k instead of $350k) and .029% ($2M vs. $3M) is immensely shortsighted when you consider the revenues a winning coach can bring in with NCAA appearances, and tournament championships, etc.

Penny-wise and pound-foolish.

Could another coach do the same or better than Hurley? Yes. Is it worth the risk (if after your evaluation you think Hurley is the best fit for the position). Not in a million years. Not if you're doing it because you're worried about the taxpayers. You're talking about a fraction of a percent of the overall budget in a state that requires so much administrative spending we can't afford to fund the pensions we've committed to.

Argue for someone else because you think he's a better coach, if you're concerned about wasting taxpayer's money, write your legislators. They're the ones wasting our money.

Always tough to debate with someone who wants to take things out of context or tries to create a straw man argument. In a previous post I wrote:

"I never said take a lesser coach. I am just not convinced that Hurley is a better coach than some of the other possibilities."

If two guys rate similarly, why get into a bidding war and pay two or three times the salary for one just because he happens to be the hot commodity at the moment. Nobody's saying be cheap. I'm saying don't get caught up in an emotional bidding game just because you locked onto one target.

As for its importance to the state budget, I will quote Everett Dirksen from a comment he made about the Federal budget back in the sixties:

"A billion here, a billion there and pretty soon you are talking about real money."

It is no wonder this country and this state are in such trouble financially. All those seemingly small percentages add up.

 

[AdamaNation]

It sucks but I feel like a lot of players get it. They have a lot of upper class men so it will probably bother them less than if he had a younger team

4 are coming to the Conn so they’re good.

 

[JMick]

4 are coming to the Conn so they’re good.

Did they sign a LOI? If so, don't be surprised when URI releases them but blocks their transfer to UConn. They'd have to sit a year

 

[Husk1881]

I heard Pitt is favorite for Hurley

 

[the Q]

We dont' have room for 4 recruits anyway.

Getting Harris alone would be nice.

But that would mean guys would have to transfer out to have that room.

 

[BFieldHusky]

Did they sign a LOI? If so, don't be surprised when URI releases them but blocks their transfer to UConn. They'd have to sit a year

You can't block someone after they sign a LOI. It's not like a transfer. You either let them out of you don't.

 

[JMick]

You can't block someone after they sign a LOI. It's not like a transfer. You either let them out of you don't.

I would be happy to be wrong. I thought they could block it for this very reason. If that's not the case and we can bring in at least 1 or 2 of Hurley's commits then that will be huge.

 

[Uconnfanatic]

4 are coming to the Conn so they’re good.

At least two of the four recruits Hurley has coming in are 2*. We killed Ollie for recruiting 2* & 3*. Why do we want these kids? They sound like the perfect mid major recruits. If these were Ollie's recruits some of you would be hammering Ollie.

 

[UConnStats]

At least two of the four recruits Hurley has coming in are 2*. We killed Ollie for recruiting 2* & 3*. Why do we want these kids? They sound like the perfect mid major recruits. If these were Ollie's recruits some of you would be hammering Ollie.

Not bad for a 2 star facing the 2nd best player in the class. Martin is really underrated.

I trust that Hurley would have an idea of whether the kids are reaches or not.

 

[BlueMAB]

Always tough to




Always tough to debate with someone who wants to take things out of context or tries to create a straw man argument. In a previous post I wrote:

"I never said take a lesser coach. I am just not convinced that Hurley is a better coach than some of the other possibilities."

If two guys rate similarly, why get into a bidding war and pay two or three times the salary for one just because he happens to be the hot commodity at the moment. Nobody's saying be cheap. I'm saying don't get caught up in an emotional bidding game just because you locked onto one target.

As for its importance to the state budget, I will quote Everett Dirksen from a comment he made about the Federal budget back in the sixties:

"A billion here, a billion there and pretty soon you are talking about real money."

It is no wonder this country and this state are in such trouble financially. All those seemingly small percentages add up.

If Hurley is the guy, then you pay him. Taking a risk on a coach without a proven record because you can get him for $2M instead of $3M thereby saving the state between .0029%(taxpayers pay $250k instead of $350k) and .029% ($2M vs. $3M) is immensely shortsighted when you consider the revenues a winning coach can bring in with NCAA appearances, and tournament championships, etc.

Penny-wise and pound-foolish.

Could another coach do the same or better than Hurley? Yes. Is it worth the risk (if after your evaluation you think Hurley is the best fit for the position). Not in a million years. Not if you're doing it because you're worried about the taxpayers. You're talking about a fraction of a percent of the overall budget in a state that requires so much administrative spending we can't afford to fund the pensions we've committed to.

Argue for someone else because you think he's a better coach, if you're concerned about wasting taxpayer's money, write your legislators. They're the ones wasting our money.

No strawman. If Benedict believes Hurley is the right guy, then paying him what Ollie made is the smart move. Nobody said pay him $4, $5, $6 million. But $3 million isn't a bidding war, it's the going rate for a school expecting to field a top 25 team every year. Just because you rate the guys you mentioned as good if not better than Hurley doesn't mean you're right. You might be, but your opinion on their ability does not validate your arbitrary salary cap.

Hop off your high horse with the budget. You have no idea who you're talking to, or what I've done to try and get this states spending under control. You're just wrong. Like it or not the basketball program is an investment into the prestige of the university. The athletics success has helped spur investments and applications, and a winning program pays for itself and brings along ancillary benefits.

Nothing is guaranteed, but Hurley has one of the better profiles out there. You're the one who arbitrarily set the limit at $1.5 and declared anything over a "bidding war", what was it you said about "strawman" arguments?

Hypocrite.

 

[JMick]

At least two of the four recruits Hurley has coming in are 2*. We killed Ollie for recruiting 2* & 3*. Why do we want these kids? They sound like the perfect mid major recruits. If these were Ollie's recruits some of you would be hammering Ollie.

where are you getting that? I see one 4* and three 3* recruits

 

[JMick]

What's better for you all:

High salary/low buyout

Or

Low salary/high buyout


Because that's probably what were looking at with any coach. If I were hurley id go for a longer contract or high buyout. It could take a while to turn this around

I think we're going to see a lower base salary with higher, achievable incentives and the buyout will be tied to the salary and not the total contract.

 

[MadDogRevival]

I love the speculation in this thread.