Hire Brad Stevens NOW!!!!!!!!

[Dogbreath2U]

I want Brad Masters.

 

[upstater]

Okay now you are just baiting him. Yes, I did just call you a Masters baiter.

I actually considered that he got really confused and was thinking of the BC AD Brad Bates. Then flipped his wig, said, "No, not him, it's Brad Masters!!"

 

[champs99and04]

Fair enough. Here goes:


It is simplistic because this is not a fantasy league. You don’t get to drop coaches, pick up other ones and immediately inherit their stats and successes, and then go back to the previous choice if that doesn’t work out, etc. Fit matters. Timing matters. Loyalty matters. Integrity matters. Tradition matters. Your word matters. I have no idea how old you are, but I see your mentality increasingly among the younger generation of young adults and I’m guessing that you are at least one generation younger than me chronologically and two in mindset (I'm 46). Perhaps it’s a function of growing up in an instant gratification and increasingly removed and detached world that is less accustomed to real time, in person, human interaction. I don’t know what it is, but I know that you can’t just treat people like parts, and your approach assumes that you can.

It is misguided and evidences a fundamental misunderstanding for several reasons, the most fundamental of which is the timing. You said you would take Stevens “all day long right now” if you think you can get him come April. That’s actually one course of action that is even worse than what Manuel did. I can understand wanting to bring in a proven “name” coach who is viewed as the next up-and-comer du jour, like Stevens, Smart or Miller (I think Stevens is the worst choice of the three for UConn, but I’ll come back to that). But if that’s what you were set on doing, you don’t give Ollie and the world your word that you are going to give Ollie a legitimate shot to earn it. In that event, you put the interim tag on Blaney, Hobbs or Miller and you start your national search and auditions outside the program now, with it known that you will be making a new hire by the Spring. Having told Ollie and the world that he has shot to earn the spot permanently, you have to give him that shot. And it has to be a real shot. If it’s just a façade to placate everyone for a short while, you will certainly alienate every ounce of institutional good will you have with respect ties to Calhoun and the players who played for him. Good luck funding your practice facility. But most importantly, you will have lied, and that will never, ever be forgotten by anybody, including your new hire. Which, in turn, means that you will never be trusted, and you can expect to be treated the same by those with whom you deal. In other words, your new head coach knows that you can’t be trusted, too, and he’ll continue to keep his eyes out for better opportunities to jump to if (more likely, when) you hit a rough patch. If you read the recent AO interview, that is exactly his mentality. And he is being killed here for it. Because, here, loyalty matters. It’s what Calhoun sold and it is what Ollie is selling. If you want to change the culture, ties and bedrock principles on which Calhoun built the program, the fastest way to do that is to do what you suggest.

The other most fundamental problem is that you simply don’t believe in Ollie and his ability to be successful here. That’s fine, but at least have the courage to admit it. All the hopes and good thoughts are nice, but what else are you going to say? Of course you’re not rooting against him. Who would? But believing in his ability to succeed is something entirely different, and what you and others are suggesting shows unequivocally that you are betting against him because you want to go in an entirely different direction right now. Again, if that’s what you want to do, you don’t lead him on. And you don’t have the luxury of keeping him around as your second (more likely fifth, I’m guessing) choice. He won’t be there once he knows that. Your word matters. If he knows you’re just waiting for something better to come along, he’ll do the same. You think Calhoun would have turned down South Carolina if he though that’s what the AD thought of him? These are people. They react to what they observe. Acting like you’re assuming that you’ve got Ollie locked up if nothing better comes along is not going to pay dividends in the long run.

I have to get some actual work done myself today, but I wanted to respond to your request for my reasons for my opinion. I only have time for some of them, but the final thing I should mention is fit—and as I’ve suggested elsewhere, I think Stevens just is not a good fit here culturally for reasons I've mentioned before. The Northeast is very different from the Midwest. This ain't Hickory. For better or worse, most of the recruits we target have legitimate NBA aspirations. Our success in producing long-tenured NBA players is one of the greatest single selling points we have. If there is one asset Ollie has to compensate for his lack of head coaching experience, it is his NBA experience. What does Stevens have to show for that? What experience does he have coaching a team of several players with those aspirations? Do his system and style of play suggest that he can help them more than others? Otherwise, what does he have to sell the potential recruits we want to sell?

As you might expect, I have a lot more thoughts on this. But I’ll leave it there for now so I can get home on time tonight and not alienate my family.

Interesting post. I'll admit - you did change my mind to an extent. However, there are aspects to your post that I disagree with. I think emotion and loyalty are factors that should be weighed in this decision, but like most things, there are a variety of variables you have to account for when making a potentially program-altering decision like this. Preferably, you'd like to keep it in family, continue to expand the Calhoun brand, and utilize the historical NBA success as the primary selling point. Transition isn't always that smooth, though. Ask Carolina fans if they love the program any less because they pryed Williams away from Kansas. Ask Kansas fans if they love the program any less because they pryed Self away from Illinois. The list goes on - at some point, the program becomes engrained in your blood, and your coaches background becomes irrelevent. Are you telling me that if Shaka Smart is hired and he wins the title with the same group of players we have this year that you wouldn't be extremely proud of the program? Hell, Jim Calhoun was hired from outside the family. Anybody coming into the program from the outside should be embraced as part of the family and community, just like an incoming recruit would be.

I did find it odd that you continually challenged jleve's belief in Coach Ollie. This isn't religion - having faith in a certain coach isn't going to change the reality. From a logical standpoint, an outsider with a respected pedigree is more of a sure thing than somebody with next to no coaching experience. I think Ollie has all the tools to be a great head coach, I really do. But does that mean I'd be surprised if he didn't work out? Absolutely not. It's not a matter of belief, it's a basic game of percentages.

I also disagree with the notion that the University is somehow doing Ollie wrongly if his contract is not renewed after the season. If anything, he should be eternally grateful for the opportunity to coach a powerhouse like UConn for seven months.

 

[BLUEDOGHOUSE]

KO antied up 100 g's for what? He did it because he will be the next coach. Another poster made reference to this and logic should dictate the obvious correct? The AD has gone Lady Gaga "Poker face" on us but in this poker game everyone at UConn will be a winner after KO gets the long term K.

You would literally have to clean house at UConn to bring in Shaka for instance. Shaka is not the type of coach that wants to risk having any baggage around him. What is baggage to Shaka is KO's #1 asset.

 

[8893]

Interesting post. I'll admit - you did change my mind to an extent. However, there are aspects to your post that I disagree with. I think emotion and loyalty are factors that should be weighed in this decision, but like most things, there are a variety of variables you have to account for when making a potentially program-altering decision like this. Preferably, you'd like to keep it in family, continue to expand the Calhoun brand, and utilize the historical NBA success as the primary selling point. Transition isn't always that smooth, though. Ask Carolina fans if they love the program any less because they pryed Williams away from Kansas. Ask Kansas fans if they love the program any less because they pryed Self away from Illinois. The list goes on - at some point, the program becomes engrained in your blood, and your coaches background becomes irrelevent. Are you telling me that if Shaka Smart is hired and he wins the title with the same group of players we have this year that you wouldn't be extremely proud of the program? Hell, Jim Calhoun was hired from outside the family. Anybody coming into the program from the outside should be embraced as part of the family and community, just like an incoming recruit would be.

I did find it odd that you continually challenged jleve's belief in Coach Ollie. This isn't religion - having faith in a certain coach isn't going to change the reality. From a logical standpoint, an outsider with a respected pedigree is more of a sure thing than somebody with next to no coaching experience. I think Ollie has all the tools to be a great head coach, I really do. But does that mean I'd be surprised if he didn't work out? Absolutely not. It's not a matter of belief, it's a basic game of percentages.

I also disagree with the notion that the University is somehow doing Ollie wrongly if his contract is not renewed after the season. If anything, he should be eternally grateful for the opportunity to coach a powerhouse like UConn for seven months.

If we went the interim route with anyone but Ollie and then hired Smart, personally I would not have any problem with that. I would be ecstatic if he brought us another NC as soon as you suggest. The problem with going in that direction now is that you have already given Ollie your word that he will get the chance to earn the job, and it will rub me and many others the wrong way if it does not appear as though he got a fair shot at that.

I am not talking about religious belief or blind faith. I am talking about the difference between "I like Ollie personally and hope he is successful, but I want someone else for head coach here because Ollie presents an unacceptable risk of failure to me" and "I believe in Ollie and his ability to be successful here, and I will give him the support he needs to succeed." Manuel's approach leans toward the former. The approach suggested by folks like jleves, zls, Huskymaniac, freescooter, Waquit, you and others is firmly rooted there; i.e., none of you would have chosen him unless he was forced on you, and even now you want to go in a different direction. An interim contract says "I don't believe you will be successful here, but I have no time to get one of my top choices, so I will give you a chance to exceed my expectations in the meantime." No contract--which, whether you want to admit it or not, is the unavoidable conclusion of the approach favored by jleves, you and the others--says "I wish you well, but I am going with someone else in whom I believe." The two or three year contract (with buyout) that I favor says "I believe that you will be successful here and I am giving you all the support you need, but I am protecting myself against the risk of failure in the event that you do not meet expectations."

The context of my suggestion that Ollie will have been treated badly was jleves's statement that, right now, he wants to get Stevens if he can. I still believe that is the worst approach possible. Ollie has been told he will have a chance to earn the job. Jleves's approach means either that that was a lie, or that he has already seen enough to conclude that Ollie is not the man for the job. Not only is that exactly the opposite of what Manuel has said, it is not an acceptable way to treat people imo. And no, I don't think Ollie or many others would be eternally grateful for having been treated like that. Most importantly, the program will suffer the consequences the perception that it is under the control of an AD who cannot be trusted.

 

[Dogdeacon]

I'd go a step further and say that about a huge percentage of our fans. they aren't really UConn fans. they are Calhoun fans. Much like political scientists now see the election of G H W Bush as "Ronald Reagan's 3rd term" many of our fans see the appointment of Ollie as Jim Calhoun's 3rd term. And for that matter, if Calhoun had proposed that the seat in the 3rd row of section 105 be named the head coach to succeed him, we'd be reading the same weepy paeans to that chair that we now read to Ollie. he's done a "great job" despite the fact that his team got taken to ot by a middle of the pack team from one of the weakest conferences in the country and lost to a mid-major from a decidedly average mid-major conference.

I think this is incredIbly missing the mark. For 26 years Jim Calhoun dedicated himself to UConn bball - he and UConn were synonymous. You aren't a fan of either you are a fan of both. To accuse folks of being overly loyal to Calhoun strikes me as having the opposite sentiment and an agenda to somehow prove that Jim Calhoun is too highly regarded or UConn fans need to acknowledge Calhoun's flaws and successes in equal measure. are we trying to prove Calhoun wasn't perfect? Of course he wasnt but Calhoun's legacy is going to be of legend quality and his temper, language or coaching flaws are now fondly missed. It's bad form and doomed to failure to expect UConn fans to do anything but revere Jim Calhoun

 

[champs99and04]

If we went the interim route with anyone but Ollie and then hired Smart, personally I would not have any problem with that. I would be ecstatic if he brought us another NC as soon as you suggest. The problem with going in that direction now is that you have already given Ollie your word that he will get the chance to earn the job, and it will rub me and many others the wrong way if it does not appear as though he got a fair shot at that.

I am not talking about religious belief or blind faith. I am talking about the difference between "I like Ollie personally and hope he is successful, but I want someone else for head coach here because Ollie presents an unacceptable risk of failure to me" and "I believe in Ollie and his ability to be successful here, and I will give him the support he needs to succeed." Manuel's approach leans toward the former. The approach suggested by folks like jleves, zls, Huskymaniac, freescooter, Waquit, you and others is firmly rooted there; i.e., none of you would have chosen him unless he was forced on you, and even now you want to go in a different direction. An interim contract says "I don't believe you will be successful here, but I have no time to get one of my top choices, so I will give you a chance to exceed my expectations in the meantime." No contract--which, whether you want to admit it or not, is the unavoidable conclusion of the approach favored by jleves, you and the others--says "I wish you well, but I am going with someone else in whom I believe." The two or three year contract (with buyout) that I favor says "I believe that you will be successful here and I am giving you all the support you need, but I am protecting myself against the risk of failure in the event that you do not meet expectations."

The context of my suggestion that Ollie will have been treated badly was jleves's statement that, right now, he wants to get Stevens if he can. I still believe that is the worst approach possible. Ollie has been told he will have a chance to earn the job. Jleves's approach means either that that was a lie, or that he has already seen enough to conclude that Ollie is not the man for the job. Not only is that exactly the opposite of what Manuel has said, it is not an acceptable way to treat people imo. And no, I don't think Ollie or many others would be eternally grateful for having been treated like that. Most importantly, the program will suffer the consequences the perception that it is under the control of an AD who cannot be trusted.

Fair enough, although while I can't speak on jleve's behalf, I'm not sure he literally means he wants to give the job to Stevens right now. I interpreted his post to mean that if there was any gray area in deciding whether Ollie had done a satisfactory job this season, the AD should go with the surer thing, or the smart buisness decision that is going to ensure the longevity of this program.

I also disagree with your assertion that Ollie is not getting a fair shot. I'm perfectly willing to give the guy a shot - in fact, I would love to give him the job. But he has to earn it first. Serving as an assistant coach for two years is not earning the job, IMO. I said before the season - Ollie's in the drivers seat to earn that head coaching job, but there are a couple of basic check points he has to touch on before Manuel can make one of the decisions that is likely to define his tenure as AD here. All he needs to do is show a basic understanding of game management, motivate his players to bust their ass every single minute of every game, and help his players improve as the season progresses. Everybody understands he's working with a limited team - that's why Manuel is so thrilled with his performance so far (and I am too) despite the fact that UConn has struggled mightily for four consecutive games now.

 

[Gurleyman]

New Mexico is "a mid-major from a decidedly mid-major conference", yet went one round further in the NCAA Tournament than us last year, and lost to Louisville by three, which dropped them to 5-1 against BCS conference schools. They beat Arizona State, Washington State, USC, Boston College, and Oklahoma State during the regular season. Granted, none of those teams were powerhouses, but neither are we right now, if we're honest with ourselves.

I'm not going to pretend that Quinny was a great day in UConn history, but look at what we're working with. We lost four guys out of the frontcourt and are basically scotch tape and glue in the paint, lack the depth to confidently sit Napier and Boatright for more than a minute at a time unless we're way ahead, and we've flown round trip to Germany and the Caribbean. Maybe we win that New Mexico game at the end with fresher legs. Maybe I'm making excuses - yes the kids are young, but young kids do get tired, and front rim jumpers or don't find around a screen at a pivotal moment when their legs let them down. Even so, we were close to getting out of Dodge 5-0 (if we get a stop when they hit the 3, I think we win it from there on adrenaline).

It's too early to tell if KO can keep us at a national contender level, and I'm not going to say Manuel is a fool if he doesn't hire him - he's paid a lot of money to have a better feel for these things than I do. But here's one other important thing to think about. Which two games have we pretty much had normal preparation time for putting in a game plan? Michigan State and Wake Forest (Vermont, too - although the trip back from Germany probably meant a day off from practice). Even if you thought KO did a lousy job against New Mexico, we basically had to put in a game plan for that one over brunch. An assistant would have been in charge of scouting NM - and another GMU, in case we got them - but the whole routine of a full practice to go over things on the floor wouldn't be there. Veteran coaches are used to that and know how to maximize a film session or a light walk through in lieu of a practice, but a rookie coach might have to learn how to handle the quick turnaround.

 

[8893]

Aside from the impact on recruiting, the biggest problem I have with the seven-month contract is the assumption that there will be a point during that time when the decision will be clear. Most likely it won't. It has just been delayed. Ollie failingly miserably is unlikely, especially now that we've seen him in action. Ollie succeeding wildly given the limitations of this roster, the postseason ban and the recruiting handcuffs is also unlikely. It will most likely be somewhere in between, and leave plenty of room for people who want instant success to lobby for Stevens/Smart/Miller/Masters/Moore/[your name here]; and for people who want to give Ollie a fairer shot to lobby that he hasn't had one.

 

[uconnfan68]

New Mexico is "a mid-major from a decidedly mid-major conference", yet went one round further in the NCAA Tournament than us last year, and lost to Louisville by three, which dropped them to 5-1 against BCS conference schools. They beat Arizona State, Washington State, USC, Boston College, and Oklahoma State during the regular season. Granted, none of those teams were powerhouses, but neither are we right now, if we're honest with ourselves.

I'm not going to pretend that Quinny was a great day in UConn history, but look at what we're working with. We lost four guys out of the frontcourt and are basically scotch tape and glue in the paint, lack the depth to confidently sit Napier and Boatright for more than a minute at a time unless we're way ahead, and we've flown round trip to Germany and the Caribbean. Maybe we win that New Mexico game at the end with fresher legs. Maybe I'm making excuses - yes the kids are young, but young kids do get tired, and front rim jumpers or don't find around a screen at a pivotal moment when their legs let them down. Even so, we were close to getting out of Dodge 5-0 (if we get a stop when they hit the 3, I think we win it from there on adrenaline).

It's too early to tell if KO can keep us at a national contender level, and I'm not going to say Manuel is a fool if he doesn't hire him - he's paid a lot of money to have a better feel for these things than I do. But here's one other important thing to think about. Which two games have we pretty much had normal preparation time for putting in a game plan? Michigan State and Wake Forest (Vermont, too - although the trip back from Germany probably meant a day off from practice). Even if you thought KO did a lousy job against New Mexico, we basically had to put in a game plan for that one over brunch. An assistant would have been in charge of scouting NM - and another GMU, in case we got them - but the whole routine of a full practice to go over things on the floor wouldn't be there. Veteran coaches are used to that and know how to maximize a film session or a light walk through in lieu of a practice, but a rookie coach might have to learn how to handle the quick turnaround.

Seriously? He's got Glen Miller, George Blaney, and Karl Hobbes on the bench with him (over 800 wins). You don't think they are nudging him in the right directions at all times? There are no coaching "oops, missed that opportunity" in this program.

 

[Gurleyman]

Yes, I'm serious - although certainly your point has merit. The thing is that whether or not the coaching staff has a ton of experience or not, there's an art to the whole process of a) the advance scouting and film study b) formulating a game plan off that information and c) getting the team to understand the game plan and execute it. It takes time to develop that whole process. Part a is left to an assistant in the early stages and the head coach will usually make his own evaluations and amend as necessary (a step that might be skipped at this stage of KO's career, at least in these quick turnaround games - I don't know). Part b is done with full coaching staff meetings. Part c is done in practice - or in this case, probably a walk through in a hotel ballroom and a cram session of film study - and then of course at game time on the fly.

Part a and part b are where KO gets a major benefit from an experienced staff - he doesn't have to cover for an inexperienced scout and can rely on their expertise to come to a consensus. By the time you get to part c, though, the voice of the head coach is usually the filter from which the players get most of their information, especially when game time comes. It's what separates being a terrific scouting assistant and being a terrific coach (that and motivation techniques, of course). You can put together a genious game plan, but if the players don't grasp it and don't execute it, it's just a nice piece of paper for a doctoral thesis.

We had lots of time to prepare for Michigan State and everything went perfect, pretty much (they had good coaches too, so we weren't going to run them out of the gym (or off the base) the whole game). If it didn't go well for New Mexico - maybe there were things that KO could have done better as the head coach on part c. Or maybe he actually was fine, and we were a little too tired, or just simply lost to a team a little better than us right now - without being a fly on the wall at Gampel, we'll never be privy to what the staff really thinks.