Is Hurley Really The Answer?

[Deadrody]

Very well said. Great summary of where lots of us are. We all want to get back to where UConn was from 1990 to 2014 and we're concerned we might not be getting the Hall of Fame coach we've come to expect. Maybe that's unrealistic with all that's changed in the past few years, but we're fans and it's our right to have outrageous expectations, isn't it? That's why the coaches and AD's get the big paychecks and why there's so much give an take on this site and this subject.

Unfortunately, especially in response to Jimdish255's post, what you're hoping for is some kind of magical, catch lightning in a jar, kind of hire.

I just don't think you'll actually find that in a tiny, tiny sample size of a couple games in one NCAA tournament, that you'll discover the next great coach that wasn't already on people's radar. You'll get much further looking at someone's body of work as coach, over multiple seasons, and even multiple schools, including recruiting, than just someone who gets their team on one good run for a couple games. You're destined for heartbreak if you go that route.

 

[Deadrody]

Rod Sellers averaged about 12 and 8 his last 2 years, I think he deserves a mention here.

Travis Knight was a very good big, before Jake. First round draft pick by the Bulls.

Eek, fellas. You know you're just making his argument for him, right ? They were a "donut" team before Jake. The fact that Rod Sellers was able to be successful playing C in a PF body doesn't change that. Nor does the fact that Calhoun was able to turn a skinny 7 footer like Travis into a first round pick. I love those teams as much as anyone, but one of the few things Calhoun's earlier teams lacked was a big man at center that could control the paint.

 

[Mots010]

Bruce Pearl.

My source says we’re going all in on Larry eustachy.

 

[champs99and04]

Oh god the message board psychologists are out in force this morning.

It’s good though. It’s nice to have the rank stupidity broken up with some PSY 100 level analysis.

It’s not advice. If you can’t do your job because you can’t handle your feelings you should resign.

Let someone worthy of 15 million dollars dollars do the job.

Why don’t you analyze why so few here care to hold anyone accountable for anything? Like in the real world.

Whenever people use phrases like "you can't handle your feelings" you can pretty much bet that their argument is starting from a very shaky place. I've also noticed that "psychologist" is often a proxy for "human" on this particular message board, and on that one I'm sure you'd be in good company.

You're a reasonable guy so I think common ground can be reached on this subject even if we disagree. I'm not asking you to feel bad for KO or anybody else for that matter. I just don't get why we can't let bad things stand for themselves without immediately projecting some judgement onto what happened thereafter. It's a societal phenomenon that makes no sense to me. Getting divorced is awful. It's an awful thing that didn't have to happen regardless of how that person may have responded to it. There's a big difference between rejecting a consequence for someone's actions and humanizing the heartbreak that may have preceded them.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

My point throughout my posts have been that we should take a good hard look at Oats before deciding that Hurley is the guy. Upon close examination, DB might find he likes Oats even better. Experience certainly favor Hurley but there may be some intangibles that favor Oats. None of us know. There isn't one definitive answer as some of you seem to think there is.

You still seem to not be able to get past this "good hard look" thing. First, how do you know AD Dave has not taken a good hard look at Oats? Second, what is the evidence that Oats is worthy of this delay in the process so that he can be vetted, interviewed, negotiate with him, etc? We can't just go taking a good hard look at every single coach who has a couple of good games in the tournament when there's no other available evidence that he's worthy of being the head coach at UConn. Third, what intangibles do you see that are present and what kinds of intangibles are going to come up in an interview? This sounds more like a fishing expedition than an interview process. You have to consider candidates and only interview those who REALLY check the boxes you're looking for, and do it quick. Oats checks a few but has some very big red flags (flight risk, recruiting ties to the area, overall experience) that DH does not.

DH isn't guaranteed to be the next Calhoun and make us a national title contender in three years, but of the available candidates he's the best option. He may not succeed, but no coach offers that guarantee. DH has the fewest overall red flags.

Others here have said AD Dave should just go get someone - who? Consider that Indiana's big program building hire was the coach of Dayton, another A-10 school. Did they settle too? They're Indiana, they should be able to go get whoever they want! You can't just go out there and pry away whoever you want. This "do a national search" nonsense is antiquated and out of touch thinking. Plus, how do you (not you necessarily, Fanatic) know AD Dave has not done a "national search"?

UConn wouldn't be "settling" with Hurley, it'd be hiring the best of the available pool of calculated risks. He is not guaranteed to succeed, he is not a slam dunk sure thing to lead us to domination again, he is not guaranteed to lead us to a national championship at any point in his potential career at UConn. But none of the other realistic candidates are either. That's not because we've fallen to a dumpster fire program, it's because no one - not even Indiana! - can just go hire whoever they want from anywhere.

 

[tzznandrew]

You still seem to not be able to get past this "good hard look" thing. First, how do you know AD Dave has not taken a good hard look at Oats? Second, what is the evidence that Oats is worthy of this delay in the process so that he can be vetted, interviewed, negotiate with him, etc? We can't just go taking a good hard look at every single coach who has a couple of good games in the tournament when there's no other available evidence that he's worthy of being the head coach at UConn. Third, what intangibles do you see that are present and what kinds of intangibles are going to come up in an interview? This sounds more like a fishing expedition than an interview process. You have to consider candidates and only interview those who REALLY check the boxes you're looking for, and do it quick. Oats checks a few but has some very big red flags (flight risk, recruiting ties to the area, overall experience) that DH does not.

DH isn't guaranteed to be the next Calhoun and make us a national title contender in three years, but of the available candidates he's the best option. He may not succeed, but no coach offers that guarantee. DH has the fewest overall red flags.

Others here have said AD Dave should just go get someone - who? Consider that Indiana's big program building hire was the coach of Dayton, another A-10 school. Did they settle too? They're Indiana, they should be able to go get whoever they want! You can't just go out there and pry away whoever you want. This "do a national search" nonsense is antiquated and out of touch thinking. Plus, how do you (not you necessarily, Fanatic) know AD Dave has not done a "national search"?

UConn wouldn't be "settling" with Hurley, it'd be hiring the best of the available pool of calculated risks. He is not guaranteed to succeed, he is not a slam dunk sure thing to lead us to domination again, he is not guaranteed to lead us to a national championship at any point in his potential career at UConn. But none of the other realistic candidates are either. That's not because we've fallen to a dumpster fire program, it's because no one - not even Indiana! - can just go hire whoever they want from anywhere.

This should be the end of the conversation here. Of course the trolls and buffoons are rampaging all over this looney bin, so...

 

[JMick]

This should be the end of the conversation here. Of course the trolls and buffoons are rampaging all over this looney bin, so...

I don't even care if we get Hurley. I just want a coach so we can put all of this to bed

 

[ctchamps]

This should be the end of the conversation here. Of course the trolls and buffoons are rampaging all over this looney bin, so...

Or just people who know how important this hire is and are nervous. This is the place to vent. We all are brothers and sisters that bleed blue and white even as we handle the situation differently from one another.

 

[tzznandrew]

Or just people who know how important this hire is and are nervous. This is the place to vent. We all are brothers and sisters that bleed blue and white even as we handle the situation differently from one another.

Yes, so everyone who wins a game in the tournament now needs to be interviewed 5 times before we make a hire?

I like you fleud, but you can't help but think that some of these posters who appeared here in the last two weeks or so--or who have an account from 2 years ago but no posts until then--are just trolls.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

Or just people who know how important this hire is and are nervous. This is the place to vent. We all are brothers and sisters that bleed blue and white even as we handle the situation differently from one another.

I agree with how important the hire is and apprehension is understandable. But as Andrew wrote, some of these takes are beyond apprehension and into insanity.

 

[Uconnfanatic]

You still seem to not be able to get past this "good hard look" thing. First, how do you know AD Dave has not taken a good hard look at Oats? Second, what is the evidence that Oats is worthy of this delay in the process so that he can be vetted, interviewed, negotiate with him, etc? We can't just go taking a good hard look at every single coach who has a couple of good games in the tournament when there's no other available evidence that he's worthy of being the head coach at UConn. Third, what intangibles do you see that are present and what kinds of intangibles are going to come up in an interview? This sounds more like a fishing expedition than an interview process. You have to consider candidates and only interview those who REALLY check the boxes you're looking for, and do it quick. Oats checks a few but has some very big red flags (flight risk, recruiting ties to the area, overall experience) that DH does not.

DH isn't guaranteed to be the next Calhoun and make us a national title contender in three years, but of the available candidates he's the best option. He may not succeed, but no coach offers that guarantee. DH has the fewest overall red flags.

Others here have said AD Dave should just go get someone - who? Consider that Indiana's big program building hire was the coach of Dayton, another A-10 school. Did they settle too? They're Indiana, they should be able to go get whoever they want! You can't just go out there and pry away whoever you want. This "do a national search" nonsense is antiquated and out of touch thinking. Plus, how do you (not you necessarily, Fanatic) know AD Dave has not done a "national search"?

UConn wouldn't be "settling" with Hurley, it'd be hiring the best of the available pool of calculated risks. He is not guaranteed to succeed, he is not a slam dunk sure thing to lead us to domination again, he is not guaranteed to lead us to a national championship at any point in his potential career at UConn. But none of the other realistic candidates are either. That's not because we've fallen to a dumpster fire program, it's because no one - not even Indiana! - can just go hire whoever they want from anywhere.

I didn't say they would be settling if they chose Hurley. I have said many times that I like Hurley. I just suggested that I like what I see with Oats and that it makes sense to thoroughly check him out before moving forward with Hurley? Taking an extra day, two or three to check out a young coach that seems to have a very bright future would seem prudent to me. You can belittle his accomplishments all you want but he's got a lot more than these two games in the tournament. All I can say is I'm glad you are not the GM given your overall thought process and the way you reach a conclusion.

 

[Uconnfanatic]

Yes, so everyone who wins a game in the tournament now needs to be interviewed 5 times before we make a hire?

I like you fleud, but you can't help but think that some of these posters who appeared here in the last two weeks or so--or who have an account from 2 years ago but no posts until then--are just trolls.

I suspect I have been following the program for much longer than you. I've been following them since 1963. How about you? I don't typically have the time or inclination to post a lot on opinion boards where there tend to be constant ego battles. The funny thing is guys like you actually think there is a hierarchy based on the # of posts you have. We'll make you the COO of the Boneyard. How's that?

 

[tzznandrew]

I suspect I have been following the program for much longer than you. I've been following them since 1963. How about you? I don't typically have the time or inclination to post a lot on opinion boards where there tend to be constant ego battles. The funny thing is guys like you actually think there is a hierarchy based on the # of posts you have. We'll make you the COO of the Boneyard. How's that?

Yay! Let's have a debate about how long we've been fans! I've been a fan since James Naismith! I win!

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

I didn't say they would be settling if they chose Hurley. I have said many times that I like Hurley. I just suggested that I like what I see with Oats and that it makes sense to thoroughly check him out before moving forward with Hurley? Taking an extra day, two or three to check out a young coach that seems to have a very bright future would seem prudent to me. You can belittle his accomplishments all you want but he's got a lot more than these two games in the tournament. All I can say is I'm glad you are not the GM given your overall thought process and the way you reach a conclusion.

I wasn't directing the "settling" comments at you, that was to other posters.

What are his accomplishments beyond these two games? I've been over my arguments on Oats/Hurley in a very nuanced way in a prior post. He went 37-30 in his first two seasons and lost in the first round of the tournament. He took over a Buffalo program already in good condition. He's a legitimate flight risk to another college HC job. He has no recruiting ties to this area. He has no connection to UConn whatsoever. He has only three years of HC experience. All of these things do not apply to DH.

You can continue to ignore all of these comments all you want and claim I'm rushing to judgment and summarily ignoring Oats - I'm not. He may well turn out to be a great coach, he's off to a great start in his career. But he's not proven himself as a program builder, nor does he have lengthy HC experience. While I wouldn't be unhappy if he was the hire, I think he's much less of a fit for UConn specifically.

 

[Uconnfanatic]

Yay! Let's have a debate about how long we've been fans! I've been a fan since James Naismith! I win!

You are the one suggesting that anyone that's not a frequent poster on here and now on here debating the coaching hire, is a troll. We are all big fans of the program. Why is it only your opinion matters?

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

I suspect I have been following the program for much longer than you. I've been following them since 1963. How about you?

My family has had season tickets for over 50 years, my dad started going to games at the Field House when he was a grad student in the 60s, he passed it along to my brother and I.

 

[Uconnfanatic]

My family has had season tickets for over 50 years, my dad started going to games at the Field House when he was a grad student in the 60s, he passed it along to my brother and I.

Thanks but the question was directed to tzznandrew not you.

 

[WinnersCircle]

This boeheim guy is a young up and comer. Might be the right "pick".

 

[tzznandrew]

You are the one suggesting that anyone that's not a frequent poster on here and now on here debating the coaching hire, is a troll. We are all big fans of the program. Why is it only your opinion matters?

Yes. That's what I said. My words exactly.

Not people saying the same thing over and over again, who more or less appeared in the last week or so and keep putting forward the same simplistic arguments--Let's hire an Italian! How about that-UMBC-guy, he seems cool!--are probably trolls.

If you fit in to that, you do. If not, perhaps you should consider why so many people thing you might and adjust.

 

[tzznandrew]

Thanks but the question was directed to tzznandrew not you.

It's completely irrelevant to a basketball forum. I can never tell whether what you say is true or not. It's very easy to lie. But I, who have been a member of this community since 2002 or so, can look to posters--some of whom I agree with and some of whom I don't--who've been here a long time and know that they're not trolls.

That you posted a few times when Calhoun died, and a few times after Wes died, leads me to believe you aren't one. You're just not used to participating in the board in the most productive way. But you aren't really the problem on the board here. It's a bunch of others who have also just appeared in the last week or few months who are insufferable. You? I suspect you'll be alright.

 

[Uconnfanatic]

Yes. That's what I said. My words exactly.

Not people saying the same thing over and over again, who more or less appeared in the last week or so and keep putting forward the same simplistic arguments--Let's hire an Italian! How about that-UMBC-guy, he seems cool!--are probably trolls.

If you fit in to that, you do. If not, perhaps you should consider why so many people thing you might and adjust.

So how many years has it been?

 

[ctchamps]

Yes, so everyone who wins a game in the tournament now needs to be interviewed 5 times before we make a hire?

I like you fleud, but you can't help but think that some of these posters who appeared here in the last two weeks or so--or who have an account from 2 years ago but no posts until then--are just trolls.

Can you honestly say that whatever anyone says in this forum really affects any outcome of events.

Perhaps if one of us has the financial power to put up millions than yes. Otherwise even the most intelligent of us are expressing opinions that impact zero with the program.

We’re all just insisting people should think the way we do. Won’t happen. In fact we’re more likely to become entrenched in our arguments because someone says something that offends us.

I probably should return to a role of arbiter as opposed to playing the ridiculous game of ego power trip that is pervasive in this forum.

Suffice it to say I held out to the seventh decade before allowing myself the luxury of removing restraint. I know it’s wrong but I have my reasons.

You, @Storrs South, @tcf15 and a few others have an astute understanding of the game that provides many of us needed value and information about UConn men’s BB.

You have a right to be frustrated with obtuse thinking. And you have the right to target obtuse thinkers. If this makes you feel better go for it. As I said I’m doing this as well. But know that the gratification we get from this accomplishes nothing other than feeding our personal needs. We’re better off served to rise above the emotional immaturity expressed in these threads as opposed to lowering ourselves to the immature levels that disgust us.

 

[brasssbonanzaa]

So how many years has it been?

Why is that relevant in any way other than to deflect and obfuscate the points him and I have addressed to you about your thoughts on Oats - what's the evidence of his worthiness?

 

[tzznandrew]

Can you honestly say that whatever anyone says in this forum really affects any outcome of events.

Perhaps if one of us has the financial power to put up millions than yes. Otherwise even the most intelligent of us are expressing opinions that impact zero with the program.

We’re all just insisting people should think the way we do. Won’t happen. In fact we’re more likely to become entrenched in our arguments because someone says something that offends us.

I probably should return to a role of arbiter as opposed to playing the ridiculous game of ego power trip that is pervasive in this forum.

Suffice it to say I held out to the seventh decade before allowing myself the luxury of removing restraint. I know it’s wrong but I have my reasons.

You, @Storrs South, @tcf15 and a few others have an astute understanding of the game that provides many of us needed value and information about UConn men’s BB.

You have a right to be frustrated with obtuse thinking. And you have the right to target obtuse thinkers. If this makes you feel better go for it. As I said I’m doing this as well. But know that the gratification we get from this accomplishes nothing other than feeding our personal needs. We’re better off served to rise above the emotional immaturity expressed in these threads as opposed to lowering ourselves to the immature levels that disgust us.

Fleud,

We're all on the board here to share our opinions, and you are right that none of what we share will ultimately matter to those with money.

At the same time this particular board has a special meaning for many of us here--we've been a community for a long time. A bunch of know-nothings clogging up the board asking if we ought to interview the coach of the Jazz or any other inane thought mucks the place up a bit. Perhaps I muddy the waters by wading in and telling them so, but so be it, I guess.

 

[ctchamps]

I agree with how important the hire is and apprehension is understandable. But as Andrew wrote, some of these takes are beyond apprehension and into insanity.

Assuming any of us can be absolutely objective about any of this and therefore are correct about our perception explain to me how it is sane to argue with insanity. Or why it is necessary.