What do you think about the one year audition for KO?

[BlueMAB]

We agree on this. I've been saying this from the start. All I'm doing is countering the idea that one, coaching successions chosen by the old HC never work out. I never made that argument.


Two, that someone whose basketball experience has been as a player mostly never works out. Three, that assistant coaching experience is more valuable than playing experience. I never made that argument.

I buy that HC experience is more valuable.

But the argument broached here is not whether you want to break with Calhoun's suggestion and move on, but rather what level of support the AD should have shown at this crucial time in the program's history.

Because there are surely other posters here who are not fans of the Ollie hire but who also believe it's important for the school to support the coach they choose in the fullest manner possible. He did that. He was stuck with Ollie, whether he wanted him or not. So he gave him a one year audition without an "interim" tag. Meaning it's his to lose going forward, he is not simply a temp.

The first two replies are why I believe you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[BlueMAB]

What a ridiculous comment. By saying I trust an expert, I made it about me? Loony. I obviously have nothing to do with this. I'm commenting on a message board at noon on a Friday, for heaven's sake. It wouldn't be unfortunate AT ALL for me if UConn achieves success.

It was not a certainty, prior to Calhoun's broken hip, that he was stepping down. Not at all.

Are you going to acknowledge facts or just argue? Because I have better things to do.

Calhoun has always made it very clear, that when he decided to step down it would be in the fall, closer to the start of the next season. Not immediately after the most recent season. He has said it for years. Whether or not the hip made that decision easier this year, we'll never know. But the fact remains he was always going to retire in the fall, close to the start of the season.

If you refuse to admit that fact, then you're really just arguing to be an @ss.

 

[upstater]

Are you going to acknowledge facts or just argue? Because I have better things to do.

Calhoun has always made it very clear, that when he decided to step down it would be in the fall, closer to the start of the next season. Not immediately after the most recent season. He has said it for years. Whether or not the hip made that decision easier this year, we'll never know. But the fact remains he was always going to retire in the fall, close to the start of the season.

If you refuse to admit that fact, then you're really just arguing to be an @ss.

It's funny. We've reached the point we're we've accused each other of the exact same thing. I mean, I see your arguments as becoming increasingly preposterous and designed to extend the argument. I don't know why, but just to mimic your latest, don't be a donkey.

 

[upstater]

The first two replies are why I believe you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

You are arguing just for the sake of arguing.

You clearly, clearly, clearly know that posters making the full support argument are talking about giving Ollie a longer deal and not sounding wishy-washy at the podium.

Yet you write this trash about Manuel's degree of support?

How am I supposed to take you seriously?

 

[upstater]

What is made up? The things that are" passed off as fact" are in fact, facts. Hopkins has been an assistant for 15 plus years. I gave you a link on Gross's position where he denied making Hopkins coach in waiting. And which member of the staff did Ollie hire? Did I miss that somewhere? What top program brough tin a guy with virtually no coaching experience as their head coach?

Holy cow. I pointed out which fact is made up. You even responded to the post. The idea that Hobbs being moved to assistant was forced on Ollie is made up.

 

[freescooter]

upstater you're a riot. You make up stuff about the people you disagree with and then you attack them for it...

 

[BlueMAB]

You are arguing just for the sake of arguing.

You clearly, clearly, clearly know that posters making the full support argument are talking about giving Ollie a longer deal and not sounding wishy-washy at the podium.

Yet you write this trash about Manuel's degree of support?

How am I supposed to take you seriously?

Your problem is you feel inclined to make assumptions.

You assume Gross made the right decision, and Hopkins is a success before he's ever coached a game.

You assume I'm responding to people that I haven't quoted, or cited specifically, and then tell me why I'm wrong for responding to something I never responded to.

I understand why people are frustrated Ollie wasn't shown more support. I disagree with them, but I understand it. I don't believe he deserved a longer deal, and I don't blame the AD for wanting to make this hire his own since he has to live with the consequences, not the new assistant AD who is retiring.

The AD was put in an impossible situation. He was forced to hire a guy he didn't want to hire, and people are upset he didn't show the man he didn't really want to hire more support?

And I'm not to be taken seriously because you can't accept that fact? Ok skippy, enjoy your day.

 

[8893]

We agree on this. I've been saying this from the start. All I'm doing is countering the idea that one, coaching successions chosen by the old HC never work out. Two, that someone whose basketball experience has been as a player mostly never works out. Three, that assistant coaching experience is more valuable than playing experience.

I buy that HC experience is more valuable.

But the argument broached here is not whether you want to break with Calhoun's suggestion and move on, but rather what level of support the AD should have shown at this crucial time in the program's history.

Because there are surely other posters here who are not fans of the Ollie hire but who also believe it's important for the school to support the coach they choose in the fullest manner possible.

This is exactly the point imo. We know that the financial difference between a two-year contract and a seven-month contract for Kevin had nothing to do with it. But the difference in perception is light years away imo, both in terms of what it says to Kevin and to the outside world. A two-year contract says "I believe that you will succeed as our next head coach," but it leaves you an out if things go badly. A seven-month contract says "I don't believe that you will succeed as our next head coach, but at this late date I have no other choice; you will have to prove it to me."

I have less of a problem with the effect this may have on Kevin. I truly believe him when he says that this type of challenge is one he welcomes and that he has accepted and overcome his entire life, and I think it will be motivation for him and his players. What concerns me is the message that it sends to the outside world. No one would have thought any less of Manuel if he gave a two-year deal. To the contrary, I think he would have earned more respect as even more of a class act and a leader himself. One who has the confidence and experience to know that throwing your support behind good people is the way to succeed. He could exercise all the restraint in the world that he wants to within UConn, and I wish that's where he would have kept his obvious doubts about Kevin, or his own insecurity in making this decision. To me, it now looks like he is wearing his doubt and insecurity on his sleeve. And I don't underestimate the contagious power of either support or the lack thereof. IMO there is something to be said for the power of believing in people, or at least giving the appearance that you do.

The other thing that this has made clear to me is that if JC had retired sooner, as many here have suggested, there is no way Kevin gets a shot as head coach. That being the case, I am glad he did what he did. I want to see Kevin get a chance, and I believe that he will be a successful head coach here or elsewhere.

 

[upstater]

The first two replies are why I believe you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

OK then, I misinterpreted your response earlier. When I wrote that Ollie has plenty of NBA experience that counts for something, you responded about Michael Jordan. I thought that was diminishing Ollie's experience. That's why I wrote that I was countering that idea.

 

[upstater]

upstater you're a riot. You make up stuff about the people you disagree with and then you attack them for it...

Oh, I'm the one that made up the stuff about Hobbs being foisted won Ollie. Yeah, good work freescooter.

Anyone who reads this can easily tell that you're full of it.

 

[upstater]

Your problem is you feel inclined to make assumptions.

You assume Gross made the right decision, and Hopkins is a success before he's ever coached a game.

Nope, never said that. Said there is no talk about Gross's ego or cojones for taking orders from Boeheim.

You assume I'm responding to people that I haven't quoted, or cited specifically, and then tell me why I'm wrong for responding to something I never responded to.

Have no idea what this is in reference to.

I understand why people are frustrated Ollie wasn't shown more support. I disagree with them, but I understand it. I don't believe he deserved a longer deal, and I don't blame the AD for wanting to make this hire his own since he has to live with the consequences, not the new assistant AD who is retiring.

The AD was put in an impossible situation. He was forced to hire a guy he didn't want to hire, and people are upset he didn't show the man he didn't really want to hire more support?

The AD should pipe down. It's not about him.

And I'm not to be taken seriously because you can't accept that fact? Ok skippy, enjoy your day.

Yeah, I can't take you seriously because you're coming on here claiming Manuel gave Ollie his fullest support. Please!!!!!!

 

[upstater]

This is exactly the point imo. We know that the financial difference between a two-year contract and a seven-month contract for Kevin had nothing to do with it. But the difference in perception is light years away imo, both in terms of what it says to Kevin and to the outside world. A two-year contract says "I believe that you will succeed as our next head coach," but it leaves you an out if things go badly. A seven-month contract says "I don't believe that you will succeed as our next head coach, but at this late date I have no other choice; you will have to prove it to me."

I have less of a problem with the effect this may have on Kevin. I truly believe him when he says that this type of challenge is one he welcomes and that he has accepted and overcome his entire life, and I think it will be motivation for him and his players. What concerns me is the message that it sends to the outside world. No one would have thought any less of Manuel if he gave a two-year deal. To the contrary, I think he would have earned more respect as even more of a class act and a leader himself. One who has the confidence and experience to know that throwing your support behind good people is the way to succeed. He could exercise all the restraint in the world that he wants to within UConn, and I wish that's where he would have kept his obvious doubts about Kevin, or his own insecurity in making this decision. To me, it now looks like he is wearing his doubt and insecurity on his sleeve. And I don't underestimate the contagious power of either support or the lack thereof. IMO there is something to be said for the power of believing in people, or at least giving the appearance that you do.

The other thing that this has made clear to me is that if JC had retired sooner, as many here have suggested, there is no way Kevin gets a shot as head coach. That being the case, I am glad he did what he did. I want to see Kevin get a chance, and I believe that he will be a successful head coach here or elsewhere.

Well stated.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Agreed. KO got a raw deal, but he's never had it easy. It will motivate him to fight for his coaching life. I'm hoping he gets a mid-season extension so that recruiting will be smooth. At this point, the recruiting situation is very similar to before Coach Calhoun retired. How do recruits know that KO will be the coach after 2013; how can they commit knowing that in 2013-2014 a different system may be run? I think Calhoun is going to play a large role behind the scenes to teach KO about situational coaching to ensure he succeeds. Half of coaching is recruiting IMO (Squid), and Ollie has that down well. His staff his strong, his players are loyal...I'd be surprised if he does not succeed.

How is this a raw deal? It's a fantastic deal. Here's a guy that on resume alone, wouldn't get a look at a head coaching job at U Hartford, and he's the head coach at one of the top programs in the country. He has been very fortunate to be given even this opportunity.

I think that no matter who was named the coach, KO, Hobbs, or Blaney (God forbid), nobody should get more than a one year contract until a thorough search and interview process is conducted. I suspect that UConn will do that in the spring unless it is obvious that he's destined to be one of the all time greats. I doubt that it will be obvious.

As for recruits, they are looking at two options: (1) Kevin Ollie or (2) somebody better than Kevin Ollie. There are no other options. I think every recruit knows that if KO is let go, it will because UConn landed a pretty big name coach. They aren't dumping him for Tom Moore or Howie Dickerman.

 

[ctchamps]

This is exactly the point imo. We know that the financial difference between a two-year contract and a seven-month contract for Kevin had nothing to do with it. But the difference in perception is light years away imo, both in terms of what it says to Kevin and to the outside world. A two-year contract says "I believe that you will succeed as our next head coach," but it leaves you an out if things go badly. A seven-month contract says "I don't believe that you will succeed as our next head coach, but at this late date I have no other choice; you will have to prove it to me."

I have less of a problem with the effect this may have on Kevin. I truly believe him when he says that this type of challenge is one he welcomes and that he has accepted and overcome his entire life, and I think it will be motivation for him and his players. What concerns me is the message that it sends to the outside world. No one would have thought any less of Manuel if he gave a two-year deal. To the contrary, I think he would have earned more respect as even more of a class act and a leader himself. One who has the confidence and experience to know that throwing your support behind good people is the way to succeed. He could exercise all the restraint in the world that he wants to within UConn, and I wish that's where he would have kept his obvious doubts about Kevin, or his own insecurity in making this decision. To me, it now looks like he is wearing his doubt and insecurity on his sleeve. And I don't underestimate the contagious power of either support or the lack thereof. IMO there is something to be said for the power of believing in people, or at least giving the appearance that you do.

The other thing that this has made clear to me is that if JC had retired sooner, as many here have suggested, there is no way Kevin gets a shot as head coach. That being the case, I am glad he did what he did. I want to see Kevin get a chance, and I believe that he will be a successful head coach here or elsewhere.

No way we can be certain WM considered this in his decision making process ( we can be reading things that don't exist or omitting things that do) but the consideration of a two year contract has so much more upside than downside relative to the one year imo as well.

 

[BlueMAB]

OK then, I misinterpreted your response earlier. When I wrote that Ollie has plenty of NBA experience that counts for something, you responded about Michael Jordan. I thought that was diminishing Ollie's experience. That's why I wrote that I was countering that idea.

Yes, it counts for something. But we don't know how important it is until he actually does the job. I also wrote there are plenty of examples both positive and negative of players with a lot of experience becoming coaching.

IMO, an assistant with 17 years of experience at a high major program under a hall of fame coach, is not comparable to a guy with 13 years of playing in the NBA.

Ollie could turn out to be a better coach, we won't know for awhile, but you compared the situation simply because they are both assistants. That's all they have in common. And Hopkins hasn't coached a game, but you continue to make the argument Gross made the right decision, as if it's a foregone conclusion that he will be succesfull.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Jordan was the best ever. How's that worked out for him as GM?

How about Isaiah Thomas? There are plenty of examples of guys who had playing experience and couldn't coach.... and vice versa. The fact is, 15 years of coaching is different than 13 years of playing. Whether it's better, worse, or indifferent is unknowable (unless like you, we can predict the future and call Hopkins a success before he's ever coached a game).

Playing, coaching, managing. They are different skills.

You continue to ignore the positive things I've said about KO only to pick a fight. The fact is, no. 13 years of playing is not equivalent to 15 years of coaching. Ollie may very well be succesful. And I don't think Manuel made a mistake in giving him an audition. I've only said that if Warde wants to hire somebody else, that's the job we've hired him to do. He needs to be allowed to do it.

What's Hopkin's record as head coach of Saracuse? You're ASSuming he's going to be succesful. Nobody knows how that will work out.

Once again, Gross did what he WANTED to do. Manuel was FORCED into this decision. That alone makes the situations different. If Manuel had wanted to name Ollie the coach in waiting 2 years ago, that's his decision. He didn't make that decision though for a reason. He should be allowed to do his job, it doesn't matter who you trust more.

Exactly right. And look at coaches in other sports like Belichick and Bill Walsh, who never really played. It is a different skill set to play vs. coach. Now Kevin has intangibles as a player that suggest that he's coaching material. I'd say the same about say, Jason Varitek. That doesn't mean they skip to the top of the ladder and don't start at the bottom.

For all that, as a UConn fan it would be fantastic if Kevin Ollie turns out to be a superb coach. We all win in that scenario. But if it backfires, like it or not, it's on Saint James Calhoun for preventing the AD from doing his job with a proper search and evaluation.

 

[BlueMAB]

Yeah, I can't take you seriously because you're coming on here claiming Manuel gave Ollie his fullest support. Please!!!!!!

Please quote the post where I said Manuel gave Ollie his fullest support.

 

[upstater]

Yes, it counts for something. But we don't know how important it is until he actually does the job. I also wrote there are plenty of examples both positive and negative of players with a lot of experience becoming coaching.

IMO, an assistant with 17 years of experience at a high major program under a hall of fame coach, is not comparable to a guy with 13 years of playing in the NBA.
Ollie could turn out to be a better coach, we won't know for awhile, but you compared the situation simply because they are both assistants. That's all they have in common. And Hopkins hasn't coached a game, but you continue to make the argument Gross made the right decision, as if it's a foregone conclusion that he will be succesfull.

Were I a Syracuse fan choosing between Hopkins and Ollie, I take Ollie.

Never said anything about Gross making the right decision.

 

[upstater]

Please quote the post where I said Manuel gave Ollie his fullest support.

Me: "Because there are surely other posters here who are not fans of the Ollie hire but who also believe it's important for the school to support the coach it chooses in the fullest manner possible."

You on Manuel: "He did that. He was stuck with Ollie, whether he wanted him or not. So he gave him a one year audition without an "interim" tag. Meaning it's his to lose going forward, he is not simply a temp."

 

[BlueMAB]

Were I a Syracuse fan choosing between Hopkins and Ollie, I take Ollie.

Never said anything about Gross making the right decision.

Gross did the smart thing and took the expert's recommendation.

 

[BlueMAB]

Me: "Because there are surely other posters here who are not fans of the Ollie hire but who also believe it's important for the school to support the coach it chooses in the fullest manner possible."

You on Manuel: "He did that. He was stuck with Ollie, whether he wanted him or not. So he gave him a one year audition without an "interim" tag. Meaning it's his to lose going forward, he is not simply a temp."

Ok, I'll explain.

The fullest manner possible has different meanings to you, I, and Warde Manuel.

WM didn't want to hire Ollie, I think that's pretty clear. He was stuck with him, HIS fullest manner possible of supporting Ollie was to give him the job for one year without the interim tag.

Your "fullest manner possible" may have been a 3 year contract.

Someone else's "fullest manner possible" may have been a 5 year contract, Calhoun's may have been a 10 year contract, and to Ollie's wife that might mean coach for life.

It's obvious that I wasn't making the argument that Manuel did everything you, other fans, or KO wanted to show him the fullest support possible, but that Manuel showed him the fullest support possible that he was comfortable showing since he clearly didn't want to hire him without going through the full process of interviewing numerous candidates.

I made the mistake of assuming you could understand that since I clearly said he didn't want to hire him in the first place. Cheesus.

 

[IMind]

I posted this in the other thread but it's applies here.

Is this the optimal situation? No... but I think this isn't a horrible compromise. I mean look, it's clear Kevin Ollie isn't the ADs guy. If he was he'd have a four year deal... but I think by not attaching the dreaded interim tag does mean a little something.

I think a little too much is being made of the one year deal thing. This season was going to be written off anyway, and if Calhoun retired next March you'd be in the exact same situation you'll be if you decide by March that KO isn't the guy. You'd still have to do a coaching search. You still would have to wait until after the NCAA tournament to get anyone most likely anyway... unless you got an assistant from somewhere... and I can't see that happening. Recruiting would take a hit no matter what.... it gives KO a chance to earn the job. If he's even reasonably successful with all the crap stacked against him then KO will force the matter.

Quite frankly I think this will all be decided either way by February. If Manuel doesn't have this worked out by April or just gives Ollie another one year deal then I'll jump all over the guy...

It sucks a bit all around... but it is what it is. I personally believe that KO is going to be the coach this time next year with a long term contract.

 

[Taco]

I think the one year sends potential recruits the right message - that the program is not going to be allowed to backslide. I think KO will do a good job with what he's got this year (even better than they would have w/ JC??), but if not you don't want to fall into obscurity like say St Johns after Carneseca or Seton Hall after PJ. Recruits will hopefully look at the situation thinking UCONN will achieve or they'll go out and get a big name coach.

 

[upstater]

The smart thing is taking the expert's recommendation.

That doesn't mean Hopkins is going to be a good coach.

 

[upstater]

Ok, I'll explain.

The fullest manner possible has different meanings to you, I, and Warde Manuel.

WM didn't want to hire Ollie, I think that's pretty clear. He was stuck with him, HIS fullest manner possible of supporting Ollie was to give him the job for one year without the interim tag.

Your "fullest manner possible" may have been a 3 year contract.

Someone else's "fullest manner possible" may have been a 5 year contract, Calhoun's may have been a 10 year contract, and to Ollie's wife that might mean coach for life.

It's obvious that I wasn't making the argument that Manuel did everything you, other fans, or KO wanted to show him the fullest support possible, but that Manuel showed him the fullest support possible that he was comfortable showing since he clearly didn't want to hire him without going through the full process of interviewing numerous candidates.

I made the mistake of assuming you could understand that since I clearly said he didn't want to hire him in the first place. Cheesus.

This is weasly. Clearly, several of us are saying here that Ollie should have been given more support. The point we're making: Manuel's fullest support should have meant a longer term deal. Can't understand why you're being argumentative here.

 

[BlueMAB]

http://borgesblognhr.blogspot.com/

“I’m looking to see how he is on the sidelines, how he handles decision-making, how he does substitutions and things that are normal in the course of a game,” he said. “How does he handle a loss with a team, how does he motivate them the next day to come back and play. How's he handling practice and the staff and all the things that come with being a head coach at this level. I want to see it, because I can’t turn to somebody and say, ‘Hey, how did he do? How was he as a head coach?’ I need to see that. It really, truly is a long-term plan. I want to see where Kevin is before I extend that long-term contract. But I love Kevin, I’ve enjoyed working with him the past six months. I see why Jim believes in him so much, but I want to see it myself before I would make that determination.”


this is an entirely fair and professional manner of handling this situation.

 

[upstater]

I think the one year sends potential recruits the right message - that the program is not going to be allowed to backslide. I think KO will do a good job with what he's got this year (even better than they would have w/ JC??), but if not you don't want to fall into obscurity like say St Johns after Carneseca or Seton Hall after PJ. Recruits will hopefully look at the situation thinking UCONN will achieve or they'll go out and get a big name coach.

UConn will achieve what in the next year in recruits' eyes?

What are recruits going to see. It's February 15th. What are they seeing?

 

[BlueMAB]

This is weasly. Clearly, several of us are saying here that Ollie should have been given more support. The point we're making: Manuel's fullest support should have meant a longer term deal. Can't understand why you're being argumentative here.

He doesn't deserve a longer deal, and if Manuel didn't want to hire him in the first place without a full coaching search to see all interested applicants, why in the world would he give him a long term deal? He's never been the head coach, and he deserves a 3-4 year deal to one of the top programs in the country? Were it not for Calhoun he probably wouldn't even be seriously considered. That may be a mistake or it may not, but it's the truth.

You'd rather he give him a 3 year deal and start interviewing the spring so he can fire him and hire the guy he wants rather than being open, honest, and professional?

 

[BlueMAB]

The smart thing is taking the expert's recommendation.

That doesn't mean Hopkins is going to be a good coach.

Experts make poor recommendations all the time. The smart thing is hiring the guy you want and owning the decision. The weasly thing is allowing someone else to do your job for you. If Gross believes in Hopkins, fine. If he doesn't, and is just going to point to Boeheim, he's not doing his job.

 

[upstater]

Experts make poor recommendations all the time. The smart thing is hiring the guy you want and owning the decision. The weasly thing is allowing someone else to do your job for you. If Gross believes in Hopkins, fine. If he doesn't, and is just going to point to Boeheim, he's not doing his job.

Experts have more expertise and make expert decisions more often than non-experts.