Jacobs Article is up - Sheds some light on Warde's thought process

[Skiblets]

I'm just challenging the whole premise. Someone on here asked how many coaches have been fired after two seasons? I'd ask the opposite...how many train wrecks after two years have been able to turn things around and be successful when given more time?

Not many spring to mind. Schiano perhaps? Grobe at Wake?

But GRob, Krags, Spaz, everyone that followed McCartney at Colorado, Wanny, Weis and I'm sure I'm missing a bunch...man when you know, you just know

 

[metsfan2323]

The opposite of letting a retiring coach dictate whom your next coach will be is not pushing the retiring coach away from the program. It's just not.

I'm in the camp that believes that Calhoun earned the right to try it his way and go the John Thompson / Georgetown route for a while. He earned the right to dictate this one time. Not many coaches earn this right but Calhoun did.

 

[metsfan2323]

No one in their right mind is going to push Calhoun away from the program. If JC chooses to walk away from the program b/c his choice for head coach is not retained long term, then that is on JC, not WM.

Bullcrap. If Ollie gets fired after 6 months it will be a disgrace.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

In JJ's article it was a bit cryptic how he mentioned the three coaches for recruits and attributed it to WM (as the reason to retain P).

There is either far less to this than what JJ wants us to believe or there is something entirely different going on (such as WM knowing that ticket sales will be good next year regardless (due to Michigan) while a catalyst (such as a coaching change) will be needed to boost sales for the 2014 season. Another possibility is that WM doesn't want a new HC walking into our non-conference schedule next season.

 

[J187Money]

In JJ's article it was a bit cryptic how he mentioned the three coaches for recruits and attributed it to WM (as the reason to retain P).

There is either far less to this than what JJ wants us to believe or there is something entirely different going on (such as WM knowing that ticket sales will be good next year regardless (due to Michigan) while a catalyst (such as a coaching change) will be needed to boost sales for the 2014 season. Another possibility is that WM doesn't want a new HC walking into our non-conference schedule next season.

I'll be honest. I'm not sure I want someone trying to install another new system going into that schedule next year. I think we are in a tough spot regardless. Kind of a no-win situation in the short-term.

 

[Uconnalliance]

Manuel's words are irrelevant. What he does between the final whistle against Cincy and December 15 will tell us what we need to know.

And saying he wasn't decisive about Ollie is not fair. He may be 100% convinced we are going to do a national search to replace Calhoun, and given the spot Calhoun put him in had no chance to do one for this season and is doing the best he can with the hand he was dealt. If that is what he's doing, and I don't pretend to know what he's thinking, then he's been decisive -- he's just not being honest because it's not in this year's team's interest that he be honest.

I just stopped typing after reading this, well said, it's a farkin SMOKE screen the clock is ticking like a time bomb.

 

[businesslawyer]

I'm in the camp that believes that Calhoun earned the right to try it his way and go the John Thompson / Georgetown route for a while. He earned the right to dictate this one time. Not many coaches earn this right but Calhoun did.

That's fine and reasonable. As I've said, I'm on the fence on that one. But just because you would let Calhoun do what he wants does not mean that it is unreasonable for an AD to think that a program like ours deserves a national search. That is a reasonable position as well

 

[uconndogs]

In JJ's article it was a bit cryptic how he mentioned the three coaches for recruits and attributed it to WM (as the reason to retain P).

There is either far less to this than what JJ wants us to believe or there is something entirely different going on (such as WM knowing that ticket sales will be good next year regardless (due to Michigan) while a catalyst (such as a coaching change) will be needed to boost sales for the 2014 season. Another possibility is that WM doesn't want a new HC walking into our non-conference schedule next season.

Those are some very good points. And next season has all the makings of being absolutely terrible no matter who coaches. That said, if WM draws the conclusion that these are the wrong guys, then it serves all purposes to move on sooner rather than later.

 

[freescooter]

Manuel's words are irrelevant. What he does between the final whistle against Cincy and December 15 will tell us what we need to know.

And saying he wasn't decisive about Ollie is not fair. He may be 100% convinced we are going to do a national search to replace Calhoun, and given the spot Calhoun put him in had no chance to do one for this season and is doing the best he can with the hand he was dealt. If that is what he's doing, and I don't pretend to know what he's thinking, then he's been decisive -- he's just not being honest because it's not in this year's team's interest that he be honest.

This is precisely on target. It isn't in the program's interest to have the AD announcing now he is firing anybody. It just isn't. And any commnts about keeping the coach go back several weeks. A 7 game losing steak can certainly change one's perspective...If the team (read the defense) folds the rest of the way, that would factor in too.

As far as Ollie goes, isn't clear to everyone that Manuel didn't want to to be forced into taking that guy? If he had wanted Ollie, he could easily have given in to Calhoun's wishes to name him coach in waiting. That he didn't call him "interim" was designed to keep this team on track, to improve the odds for Ollie to recruit, and to placate the legion of folks who are Calhoun fans first and UConn fans only secondarily. That he didn't "set the bar at any particular level like 12, 17, 20 wins is really in Ollie's favor, though who knows what they have agreed to privately. Ollie has been given an opportunity that no junior assistant at any major program anywhere in the country would have been given. The job is his to lose. I really don't see why mets and company have such a problem with this concept.

 

[SAMCRO]

Bullcrap. If Ollie gets fired after 6 months it will be a disgrace.

If...big if... Ollie gets fired after one season (and let me be on record as saying I don't want him to be fired, and I don't think he will be fired) , but if he does get fired after this season, it will be because he very clearly demonstrated he was not ready to be the man at this stage of his coaching career. It will not be based on Wins and Losses. WM was put in just as awkward a position given the timing of JC's retirement. I have no problem with how WM handled it.

 

[freescooter]

We are in for a misearble hoops season. WM took the course of least resistance and I think that in this case it made sense. The program did not need any additional turmoil. That said, I don't think it's particularly fair to Olie and he is in a difficult spot.

How is it not fair to Ollie to be named head coach of a top 5 program in the country without having to so much as submit a resume, or put in any significant time as an assistant, with the chance to get extended by doing a reasonable job in a season where their is no pressure to win?

 

[TouchdownHusky]

We are in for a misearble hoops season. WM took the course of least resistance and I think that in this case it made sense. The program did not need any additional turmoil. That said, I don't think it's particularly fair to Olie and he is in a difficult spot.

Agreed. Then watch the panic as men's revenue sports drop to 1970s status. Warde is now on the radar, like it or not. At this point, I've got no axe to grind with him. Not yet. But keep PP for next year and I'm finished believing that he's the right man for the job.

 

[ruskin]

The football and hoop situation are apples and oranges x 1,000,000. This being the football board, I sort of hate to see it get bogged down in the KO issue and take the focus away from PP, etc.

I think it's way to soon to start throwing Manuel under the bus. The "came from a small program" stuff is nonsense. He PLAYED at Michigan and was an associate AD there. That puts him light years ahead of his predecessor.

Jacobs might have been stretching it to say that Manuel "insistent" that he won't fire P after two seasons. Here's what he said to Desmond Conner on Sept. 24 and reinforced to the New Haven Register last week

That being said, Manuel has Pasqualoni's back in terms of support. He said he's not even thinking in the direction of replacing his head coach right now.
"I'm not even thinking about whether Paul is the right coach at this point in his tenure," Manuel said. "He's fine. Nobody is working harder than Paul and that staff and those kids. My expectation and his expectation is that we go out and we plan to win every game we go into. We just have to ensure that we're doing, as coaches, as players and staff, doing everything we need to do to put ourselves in position to win but that's not even remotely in my thought process, about whether or not we have the right coach. I think we have the right coach. We just have to get better."

Asked if he's seen anything that would make him want to make any changes, Manuel said: "Nothing up to this point would make me want to pull out Paul's contract and take a look at it. My goal is to support Paul, support the other head coaches. And at the appropriate time, if it comes that way, at some point he will be the first to know. But nothing up to this point, what I've seen, would cause me to want to take a look at Paul's contract."



The man isn't blind. I'd suspect the 1-4 "run" we're on since then has changed his mind.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

The football and hoop situation are apples and oranges x 1,000,000. This being the football board, I sort of hate to see it get bogged down in the KO issue and take the focus away from PP, etc.

I think it's way to soon to start throwing Manuel under the bus. The "came from a small program" stuff is nonsense. He PLAYED at Michigan and was an associate AD there. That puts him light years ahead of his predecessor.

Jacobs might have been stretching it to say that Manuel "insistent" that he won't fire P after two seasons. Here's what he said to Desmond Conner on Sept. 24 and reinforced to the New Haven Register last week

That being said, Manuel has Pasqualoni's back in terms of support. He said he's not even thinking in the direction of replacing his head coach right now.
"I'm not even thinking about whether Paul is the right coach at this point in his tenure," Manuel said. "He's fine. Nobody is working harder than Paul and that staff and those kids. My expectation and his expectation is that we go out and we plan to win every game we go into. We just have to ensure that we're doing, as coaches, as players and staff, doing everything we need to do to put ourselves in position to win but that's not even remotely in my thought process, about whether or not we have the right coach. I think we have the right coach. We just have to get better."

Asked if he's seen anything that would make him want to make any changes, Manuel said: "Nothing up to this point would make me want to pull out Paul's contract and take a look at it. My goal is to support Paul, support the other head coaches. And at the appropriate time, if it comes that way, at some point he will be the first to know. But nothing up to this point, what I've seen, would cause me to want to take a look at Paul's contract."



The man isn't blind. I'd suspect the 1-4 "run" we're on since then has changed his mind.

I believe that what may end up being a 3-9 record in conference during his two years here (including what may be 0-7 during what could easily be argued as the weakest the BE has ever been) should be sufficient to warrant at least some consideration in changes coaches.

 

[junglehusky]

I don't know. Just for me, I would evaluate an AD over a very long time-frame. Coaches usually have a window of several years, and PP and especially GDL may be shrinking their window. At this point I'd still be okay if Warde pressures GDL to go and keeps PP for another year (in which he would clearly be on the hot seat). Whether it plays out that way or not I don't know. The most desirable outcome would be PP and co. voluntarily retiring but I really doubt he'd do that.

 

[metsfan2323]

The discussion of Ollie is relevant to this thread because the original post had a quote from Warde saying two years for P is not enough time. That begs a discussion about Ollie's 6 month contract.

 

[TheRogers]

Somewhere, on a plane 30,000' over the eastern seaboard, DeLeone is running up the aisle yipping, "Paul! Paul! Lookit! I designed ANOTHER play! I call this one the 'flippityjibbit'! It's a hand off...those are good on first down."

And you guys want to fire the staff.... for shame.

In all fairness to DeLeone, all his plays works wonders without an opposing defense.

 

[uconNYC]

The way I look at it, normally the AD chooses the head coaches, this time around JC did instead. Seeing that JC clearly knows his basketball and knows KO inside and out why not just give KO a 3-4 year contract and be done with it? You could always put in a cheap buyout if things complete collapse. So WM thinks he knows basketball better than JC? Besides, KO's contract is much cheaper than any outside coach that we would potentially bring in and the majority of the fan base are comfortable with him as JC's successor. I really don't get what the issue is.

With the KO situation and no tangible improvement in PR, Marketing, scheduling, etc., etc. I'm really starting to have doubts about WM. If he does not sack PP and GDL after the season he'll be enemy #1.

 

[Waquoit]

I think it's way to soon to start throwing Manuel under the bus. The "came from a small program" stuff is nonsense. He PLAYED at Michigan and was an associate AD there. That puts him light years ahead of his predecessor.

Jacobs might have been stretching it to say that Manuel "insistent" that he won't fire P after two seasons.
"I'm not even thinking about whether Paul is the right coach at this point in his tenure," Manuel said. .... But nothing up to this point, what I've seen, would cause me to want to take a look at Paul's contract."

You are right on the button. I didn't see any direct quotes in that Jacobs article. And as you showed, Manual gave only qualified support. No reason for him to give anything more or less, then or now. The use of "at this point" and "up to this point" is no accident. He's practically saying that nothing's been decided. The AD isn't a part of this story until after the last game.

 

[metsfan2323]

You are right on the button. I didn't see any direct quotes in that Jacobs article. And as you showed, Manual gave only qualified support. No reason for him to give anything more or less, then or now. The use of "at this point" and "up to this point" is no accident. He's practically saying that nothing's been decided. The AD isn't a part of this story until after the last game.

I stand corrected, it is not a direct quote, but Jacobs does say that Warde insists that P is not getting fired after two season. So we now know that the guy who has been feeding Dez and the gang the P is going nowhere impression is Warde himself.

 

[ruskin]

I stand corrected, it is not a direct quote, but Jacobs does say that Warde insists that P is not getting fired after two season. So we now know that the guy who has been feeding Dez and the gang the P is going nowhere impression is Warde himself.

Don't forget the Board of Trustees chair is probably feeding that narrative as well.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I stand corrected, it is not a direct quote, but Jacobs does say that Warde insists that P is not getting fired after two season. So we now know that the guy who has been feeding Dez and the gang the P is going nowhere impression is Warde himself.

For all we know WM said this once, in late September and the on the ball journalists within this state all assume that nothing can alter WM's stance.

 

[UCFBfan]

I'll be honest. I'm not sure I want someone trying to install another new system going into that schedule next year. I think we are in a tough spot regardless. Kind of a no-win situation in the short-term.

Honestly, does it matter if we have PP and GDL and their proven non-working offense or a new coach with a new system? Both situations seem like they have the same likelihood of having a winning OOC record next season. To me, I'd rather get crushed by Michigan under a new coach with the knowledge that we're building towards something that's work vs getting crushed by Michigan with PP and our continual horrid play. In the end, I'd rather beat Michigan but that's a thought for next season.

I just think it's silly to think that after two seasons of failure, a massive graduation of key Defensive players, and a lack of energy or effort from the team, that this team will somehow be better off having PP at the helm next season because the OOC schedule is tough. This football program needs to get back on track and is different than some of the major programs in that it doesn't have a rich tradition to hold on to. We have 10 years of building success and maybe that's spoiled us but in the end, the fan base isn't in a position to sustain a 5-7, 3-9, and whatever next season may bring if PP is retained.

 

[J187Money]

Honestly, does it matter if we have PP and GDL and their proven non-working offense or a new coach with a new system? Both situations seem like they have the same likelihood of having a winning OOC record next season. To me, I'd rather get crushed by Michigan under a new coach with the knowledge that we're building towards something that's work vs getting crushed by Michigan with PP and our continual horrid play. In the end, I'd rather beat Michigan but that's a thought for next season.

I just think it's silly to think that after two seasons of failure, a massive graduation of key Defensive players, and a lack of energy or effort from the team, that this team will somehow be better off having PP at the helm next season because the OOC schedule is tough. This football program needs to get back on track and is different than some of the major programs in that it doesn't have a rich tradition to hold on to. We have 10 years of building success and maybe that's spoiled us but in the end, the fan base isn't in a position to sustain a 5-7, 3-9, and whatever next season may bring if PP is retained.

That's a fair way to look at it. Just remember that when the new guy (whoever he is - if we get one) ends up 4-8.

 

[whaler11]

Almost no way anyone could win here next year. Schedule upgrades + defensive player loss is going to be almost impossible to overcome. Not enough talent on the offensive line no matter who coaches it. 5-7 would probably be about the ceiling at this point depending on how the Big East scheduling shakes out.