hoyasaxa2003
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,889
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Mar 16, 2017 15:25:19 GMT -5
I agree on most levels that Indiana would be considered a better job than Georgetown. It is "basketball school", in a power 5 conference, rich tradition and the willingness and ability to pay at the top of the coaching market for the right person. On the other hand the pressure with the Indiana job to win, to win every year and to win right away is enormous. They would most likely also be looking at different candidates. They are going to want a big name established coach from a big program, where I think the Hoyas might look at some up and coming mid major coaches, if they seems to be the right fit. While they might compete for some of the same candidates, and the Hoyas might lose out to Indiana in those cases, I think there would still be plenty of good coaches who would pursue the Hoya job Like who, They weren't exactly beating the doors down 13 years ago. Keatts and Hurley aren't exiciting me and I think we will need a very special personality to take on the extra challenges that the Thompson name will surely leave to the next coach. While I know some folks disagree with me (vehemently) and eagle54 will probably say I am using scare tactics, I really think this has always been one of the big considerations against change. I know people say things like "there are plenty of hungry coaches out there" or "for $3 million, coaches will be clamoring for the position," etc. In reality, while I think the position is definitely a better one than in 2004 (and largely because of JT3), nobody that we would get really excites me. We would either get (1) a mid-major coach like Keatts, (2) an assistant who has never been a head coach before, or (3) someone with a Georgetown connection who probably, on their face, wouldn't be hugely qualified. If we do make a change, I think the first group is the best to draw from. We aren't going to get people like Archie Miller or Gregg Marshall (if Marshall wanted to come tomorrow, I'd show him the welcome mat, but he's not coming). We could definitely pick someone like Keatts and get lucky that he happens to be a good coach, but we could also pick someone like Oliver Purnell, who was a good hire, but did nothing and fell far short of JT3's record (and yes, I think you need to look at the whole record, not just the last 2 years out of 13). I don't love the assistant route, but that could work out. And I just find it hard to see anybody in the Georgetown universe who would be qualified. Ewing would be "qualified" in the sense that he's got stature, but he doesn't have any college coaching experience and there's no indication he'd even want to do it. And outside Ewing, I don't see anybody else who could step up in a credible manner.
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
Member is Online
|
Post by Cambridge on Mar 16, 2017 15:55:16 GMT -5
And I just find it hard to see anybody in the Georgetown universe who would be qualified. Ewing would be "qualified" in the sense that he's got stature, but he doesn't have any college coaching experience and there's no indication he'd even want to do it. And outside Ewing, I don't see anybody else who could step up in a credible manner. The only Georgetown connected coach I would consider is Jaren Jackson. He was on staff previously. Is currently coaching in the D-League. And it just might...maybe....lead to us landing his son (currently committed to MSU). Longshot, sure. But that would be a way to at least try and preserve ties to the past and land a major recruit who would help jumpstart the rebuilding process.
|
|
|
Post by johnnysnowplow on Mar 16, 2017 15:56:19 GMT -5
I agree on most levels that Indiana would be considered a better job than Georgetown. It is "basketball school", in a power 5 conference, rich tradition and the willingness and ability to pay at the top of the coaching market for the right person. On the other hand the pressure with the Indiana job to win, to win every year and to win right away is enormous. They would most likely also be looking at different candidates. They are going to want a big name established coach from a big program, where I think the Hoyas might look at some up and coming mid major coaches, if they seems to be the right fit. While they might compete for some of the same candidates, and the Hoyas might lose out to Indiana in those cases, I think there would still be plenty of good coaches who would pursue the Hoya job Like who, They weren't exactly beating the doors down 13 years ago. Keatts and Hurley aren't exiciting me and I think we will need a very special personality to take on the extra challenges that the Thompson name will surely leave to the next coach. Bit of speculation on my part, but maybe they weren't beating the doors down last time because they knew Big John was still very much involved and was going to be watching over their shoulder. If there happens to be a clean break from father and son, maybe the job becomes a little more appealing. Again, just totally speculating here.
|
|
Hoyas4Ever
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
A Wise Man Once Told Me Don't Argue With Fools....
Posts: 5,448
|
Post by Hoyas4Ever on Mar 16, 2017 15:59:08 GMT -5
Agreed its a silly fire but you don't know IU basketball. All of those fans look south and see more in-state talent and don't see why Kentucky is on a different level. Tough job and I wouldn't want it in a million years. People talk about JTIII but the Boobie Knight shadow still looms large. Exactly! Part of the point I was trying to make. The fans and the administration have to realize who and what they are. It's not like Kentucky is just raiding their backyard for all their players. Crean recruited to a high level and great results comparative to the college basketball national landscape. That team would be playing in the NCAA Tournament if it wasn't for the injuries suffered to NBA level talent. The fact they fired him after all of last season's success tells me they were looking for any reason to get Crean out. They better know who they want and have a deal with his replacement already in place! It's also gotta be a big name. Don't think you can give Keatts the job after UNCW blew the lead they had today. Keatts is an up & comer in the coaching ranks but you don't replace an established and highly recognized Head Coach with strong national recruiting ties for a still unproven on the national level up & comer ata fan base that is highly delusional and an administration with no real patients. Part of the problem is watching Mike Brey out succeeding Indiana at Notre Dame with less elite level talent. I'm really curious to see who Indiana gets because the fan base and administration have made that IMO an undesirable job. Gotta expect a big name and a big payday because the goals are unrealistic and would swallow up an unproven coach.
|
|
bostonfan
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,509
|
Post by bostonfan on Mar 16, 2017 16:23:08 GMT -5
I tend to agree that the GU job is neither a bad nor an elite one, and that it takes a very unique person to hold that position. Most of the candidates whose names are out there really are not qualified for this job. I think you probably look at Amaker from Harvard. He struggled at Michigan but seems to have built a consistently strong program at Harvard and he knows how to leverage the high level academic advantage Georgetown should have. He has done pretty well recruiting at Harvard and getting high level players to commit to play there cannot be an easy thing. Not sure he wants a change as it sounds like he has a pretty sweet deal at Harvard but moving from the Ivy League to the Big East should be somewhat appealing.
|
|
vv83
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,329
|
Post by vv83 on Mar 16, 2017 16:32:05 GMT -5
You would think that Alford is a pretty obvious first choice for Indiana, right? UCLA is probably a better gig than Indiana for a host of reasons, but Alford did win a national title at Indy, there could be a realistic chance that he would relish the chance to come home and lead. Of course Alford has been a pretty average coach until he recruited Ball and Leaf to lead a strong team this season. His son also graduates this year from UCLA. It might be a smart time to cash in on his first great season as a coach, with his two best players almost surely headed to the NBA\
And the bonus is that he would not have to deal with Ball's dad for the next few years while coaching Ball's younger brothers - who don't seem to be nearly the program-transforming talents that Lonzo is. Then again - he'll have to deal with the indiana fans, who consider you a failure if you don't win a national championship every couple of years.
|
|
iowa80
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,402
|
Post by iowa80 on Mar 16, 2017 16:42:04 GMT -5
Indiana won't have to convince Alford to come if they want him. He'll buy his own ticket. I'd suspect that, whoever it is, the deal is pretty much done.
|
|
hoyainla
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Suspended
Posts: 4,719
|
Post by hoyainla on Mar 16, 2017 17:20:26 GMT -5
You would think that Alford is a pretty obvious first choice for Indiana, right? UCLA is probably a better gig than Indiana for a host of reasons, but Alford did win a national title at Indy, there could be a realistic chance that he would relish the chance to come home and lead. Of course Alford has been a pretty average coach until he recruited Ball and Leaf to lead a strong team this season. His son also graduates this year from UCLA. It might be a smart time to cash in on his first great season as a coach, with his two best players almost surely headed to the NBA\ And the bonus is that he would not have to deal with Ball's dad for the next few years while coaching Ball's younger brothers - who don't seem to be nearly the program-transforming talents that Lonzo is. Then again - he'll have to deal with the indiana fans, who consider you a failure if you don't win a national championship every couple of years. This is good analysis. I've thought for a while Alford would be looking to get out of UCLA after this good year and that was before the IU job opened up. Now its a no brainer. The next 2 Ball kids will be a huge anchor on UCLA for the next handful of years. The best thing that could happen for UCLA is that the Alford leaves and the brothers go somewhere else.
|
|
Hoyas4Ever
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
A Wise Man Once Told Me Don't Argue With Fools....
Posts: 5,448
|
Post by Hoyas4Ever on Mar 16, 2017 17:42:25 GMT -5
Alford on the surface sounds like a great fit. Hometown hero returns to lead the program. The marketing and excitement will be brought back to the program but reality is, that hire is a step back from Crean. Outside of Alonzo Ball greatness, UCLA fan base and media was ready to ride him out of town. Don't let UCLA loose early in the Tournament? Also Alford and Bobby Knight are very tight still and he considers him a mentor. What affect would that have? The only hire I think make sense and if you're going to get rid of Crean is Billy Donovan. That being said, I would not be shocked if Alford took the job after this season if they are eliminated before the Final 4.
|
|
iowa80
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,402
|
Post by iowa80 on Mar 16, 2017 17:54:15 GMT -5
Too much Billy Donovan talk. I'm having NCAA flashbacks.
Actually, Indiana-boy Brad Stevens would be the best choice, but he isn't leaving Beantown.
|
|
vv83
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,329
|
Post by vv83 on Mar 16, 2017 21:04:30 GMT -5
Alford on the surface sounds like a great fit. Hometown here returns to lead the program. The marketing and excitement will be brought back to the program but reality is, that hire is a step back from Crean. Outside of Alonzo Ball greatness, UCLA fan base and media was ready to ride him out of town. Don't let UCLA loose early in the Tournament? Also Alford and Bobby Knight are very tight still and he considers him a mentor. What affect would that have? The only hire I think make sense and if you're going to get rid of Crean is Billy Donovan. That being said, I would not be shocked if Alford took the job after this season if they are eliminated before the Final 4. I just read that Alford has something like an $8 million buyout that Indiana would have to pay. The indiana AD said that money would be no object in hiring the right coach. But $8 million is a pretty big object! Pete Thamel (SI writer, syracuse alum/media stooge) thinks that Mack and Holtmann are the top two realistic candidates for Indiana if they don't end up with alford or Archie Miller. I hope those guys stay with Xavier/Butler. Both real good coaches and we need the BE to avoid becoming a "feeder" conference for coaches who have success in the BE, then move on to a power 5 football school
|
|
deacon
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,850
|
Post by deacon on Mar 16, 2017 21:55:00 GMT -5
Alford on the surface sounds like a great fit. Hometown here returns to lead the program. The marketing and excitement will be brought back to the program but reality is, that hire is a step back from Crean. Outside of Alonzo Ball greatness, UCLA fan base and media was ready to ride him out of town. Don't let UCLA loose early in the Tournament? Also Alford and Bobby Knight are very tight still and he considers him a mentor. What affect would that have? The only hire I think make sense and if you're going to get rid of Crean is Billy Donovan. That being said, I would not be shocked if Alford took the job after this season if they are eliminated before the Final 4. I just read that Alford has something like an $8 million buyout that Indiana would have to pay. The indiana AD said that money would be no object in hiring the right coach. But $8 million is a pretty big object! Pete Thamel (SI writer, syracuse alum/media stooge) thinks that Mack and Holtmann are the top two realistic candidates for Indiana if they don't end up with alford or Archie Miller. I hope those guys stay with Xavier/Butler. Both real good coaches and we need the BE to avoid becoming a "feeder" conference for coaches who have success in the BE, then move on to a power 5 football school I wouldn't worry too much about that since Indiana is a special case. They'll offer whatever it takes financially to get the coach they want and the kind of administrative support most coaches dream about.
|
|
hoyasaxa2003
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,889
Member is Online
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Mar 16, 2017 22:49:25 GMT -5
I wouldn't worry too much about that since Indiana is a special case. They'll offer whatever it takes financially to get the coach they want and the kind of administrative support most coaches dream about. That is, until they go a few years without a national championship.
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,330
|
Post by tashoya on Mar 16, 2017 23:28:52 GMT -5
Like who, They weren't exactly beating the doors down 13 years ago. Keatts and Hurley aren't exiciting me and I think we will need a very special personality to take on the extra challenges that the Thompson name will surely leave to the next coach. While I know some folks disagree with me (vehemently) and eagle54 will probably say I am using scare tactics, I really think this has always been one of the big considerations against change. I know people say things like "there are plenty of hungry coaches out there" or "for $3 million, coaches will be clamoring for the position," etc. In reality, while I think the position is definitely a better one than in 2004 (and largely because of JT3), nobody that we would get really excites me. We would either get (1) a mid-major coach like Keatts, (2) an assistant who has never been a head coach before, or (3) someone with a Georgetown connection who probably, on their face, wouldn't be hugely qualified. If we do make a change, I think the first group is the best to draw from. We aren't going to get people like Archie Miller or Gregg Marshall (if Marshall wanted to come tomorrow, I'd show him the welcome mat, but he's not coming). We could definitely pick someone like Keatts and get lucky that he happens to be a good coach, but we could also pick someone like Oliver Purnell, who was a good hire, but did nothing and fell far short of JT3's record (and yes, I think you need to look at the whole record, not just the last 2 years out of 13). I don't love the assistant route, but that could work out. And I just find it hard to see anybody in the Georgetown universe who would be qualified. Ewing would be "qualified" in the sense that he's got stature, but he doesn't have any college coaching experience and there's no indication he'd even want to do it. And outside Ewing, I don't see anybody else who could step up in a credible manner. It's a crapshoot. Personally, I think the likelihood of a change being better in the short term is fairly low. That isn't an argument against a change. It's my attempt at being realistic. It's also not fear regardless of how many times a certain poster posts the exact same false argument every time a possible hiccup or stumble to moving on from the current staff is mentioned. Even if JT3 leaves, it's not a guarantee that Big John's presence isn't still a factor. That could be either a good or a bad thing depending, as with all of this, on many factors. If he's still involved, it could be viewed as a negative in the sense that he does wield power and sway by nature of his personality and his having built Georgetown as a destination for basketball and student athletes. It could be viewed as a positive in the sense that he remains supportive of the University and the program and is willing to help the next coach because he respects that a move had to be made. While many would probably argue that he shouldn't still be involved in the basketball side of things, I really like that he's involved in the sense that he continues to stress how slim the possibility is of a career on the professional level and the importance of taking advantage of the education available to the guys as students. Regardless, that's murky and unclear and (probably) clouds the waters in terms of the number and caliber of coaches willing to dive in for a swim. I understand being fed up and wanting success and expecting better. I think we're all on the same spectrum just not to the same degree with all of those. Disagreeing on how simple it is or how good of an idea it is or how much worse it could get by making a change or not is all based in hope and perception on both sides.
|
|
Hoyas4Ever
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
A Wise Man Once Told Me Don't Argue With Fools....
Posts: 5,448
|
Post by Hoyas4Ever on Mar 17, 2017 0:05:08 GMT -5
Alford on the surface sounds like a great fit. Hometown here returns to lead the program. The marketing and excitement will be brought back to the program but reality is, that hire is a step back from Crean. Outside of Alonzo Ball greatness, UCLA fan base and media was ready to ride him out of town. Don't let UCLA loose early in the Tournament? Also Alford and Bobby Knight are very tight still and he considers him a mentor. What affect would that have? The only hire I think make sense and if you're going to get rid of Crean is Billy Donovan. That being said, I would not be shocked if Alford took the job after this season if they are eliminated before the Final 4. I just read that Alford has something like an $8 million buyout that Indiana would have to pay. The indiana AD said that money would be no object in hiring the right coach. But $8 million is a pretty big object! Pete Thamel (SI writer, syracuse alum/media stooge) thinks that Mack and Holtmann are the top two realistic candidates for Indiana if they don't end up with alford or Archie Miller. I hope those guys stay with Xavier/Butler. Both real good coaches and we need the BE to avoid becoming a "feeder" conference for coaches who have success in the BE, then move on to a power 5 football school I just can't see Mack or Holtmann at Indiana because of they are in a great situation with their programs. To me because of the irrational fan base and administration who lack self awareness, the Indiana job isn't that great. Also I can't see Mack or Holtmann exciting the fan base without a deep run (elite 8 or better) during this tournament. Crean has had more success than the 2 of them combined in the last 5 years. But we will see. Stranger things have happened!
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,459
|
Post by TC on Mar 17, 2017 1:39:35 GMT -5
I tend to agree that the GU job is neither a bad nor an elite one, and that it takes a very unique person to hold that position. Most of the candidates whose names are out there really are not qualified for this job. I think you probably look at Amaker from Harvard. He struggled at Michigan but seems to have built a consistently strong program at Harvard and he knows how to leverage the high level academic advantage Georgetown should have. He has done pretty well recruiting at Harvard and getting high level players to commit to play there cannot be an easy thing. Not sure he wants a change as it sounds like he has a pretty sweet deal at Harvard but moving from the Ivy League to the Big East should be somewhat appealing. Explain why you think Amaker is a better coach than JT3, and why it would be a smart idea for GU to throw it's legacy to the wind, part ways with the Thompsons, buy out a contract that supposedly has three years left, and handsomely pay an inferior coach. JT3 record : Georgetown (.653) Overall (.645) Tommy Amaker : Harvard (.651) Overall (.600) And his record over the last three years isn't really any more impressive than JT3's. Both have made the tournament only once over the past 3 years.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2017 7:59:36 GMT -5
I think you probably look at Amaker from Harvard. He struggled at Michigan but seems to have built a consistently strong program at Harvard and he knows how to leverage the high level academic advantage Georgetown should have. He has done pretty well recruiting at Harvard and getting high level players to commit to play there cannot be an easy thing. Not sure he wants a change as it sounds like he has a pretty sweet deal at Harvard but moving from the Ivy League to the Big East should be somewhat appealing. Explain why you think Amaker is a better coach than JT3, and why it would be a smart idea for GU to throw it's legacy to the wind, part ways with the Thompsons, buy out a contract that supposedly has three years left, and handsomely pay an inferior coach. JT3 record : Georgetown (.653) Overall (.645) Tommy Amaker : Harvard (.651) Overall (.600) And his record over the last three years isn't really any more impressive than JT3's. Both have made the tournament only once over the past 3 years. That's all well and good. The numbers are what they are. And I understand (even if I disagree with) the "who are we going to get that will be better/do better/be able to succeed at Georgetown?" and "we could always end up like DePaul" arguments (be careful, objects in the mirror may be closer than they appear.) But when it's all said and done, no matter who else is on the market, I feel like it's reached a point where JT3 just isn't the right coach for this program anymore. Sometimes that happens. We've seen a decade of NCAA underachievement, bolstering ourselves with the memories of fun regular seasons. The first four seasons in the New Big East have been a disaster for one of the flagship programs that was supposed to lead the conference going forward. There's really no other way to frame it - while Villanova has stepped up and won a goddam National Championship, we're losing at home to DePaul and going home from the BET on Wednesday nights. Players who were supposed to be the foundation of this team will finish their college careers in Oregon and Nebraska. This year's roster included a jerry-rigged mess of late arrivals (Pryor), never-thought-he'd-be-heres (Hayes) and longshots (Mulmore) that never really was all that good. We lost Copeland mid-season, and we knew we would be losing Hayes, Cameron, and Pryor. Yet we only had a 2-person recruiting class (and the better of those two is now gone). And Mourning seems to be gone, and there are rumors of other players thinking about leaving. Former players are tweeting things like "Daddy's boy...SMH" and "Must be karma" after we lose games. The athletic department brushes off fan base on a regular basis, and alienates some of their strongest supporters in the process. The fan base is Editeded, and rightly so. It's not just about wins and losses, or about being a good man and a good representative of the University. It's about building a culture around a program that can absorb occasional transfers, or the occasional down year (or two) because you know that the foundational elements of the program are strong. And right now, the culture is toxic. When you're the person responsible for creating a toxic culture, it's hard to argue that you can be the one to turn it around.
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,459
|
Post by TC on Mar 17, 2017 8:31:25 GMT -5
But when it's all said and done, no matter who else is on the market, I feel like it's reached a point where JT3 just isn't the right coach for this program anymore. Sometimes that happens. We've seen a decade of NCAA underachievement, bolstering ourselves with the memories of fun regular seasons. The first four seasons in the New Big East have been a disaster for one of the flagship programs that was supposed to lead the conference going forward. There's really no other way to frame it - while Villanova has stepped up and won a goddam National Championship, we're losing at home to DePaul and going home from the BET on Wednesday nights. Players who were supposed to be the foundation of this team will finish their college careers in Oregon and Nebraska. This year's roster included a jerry-rigged mess of late arrivals (Pryor), never-thought-he'd-be-heres (Hayes) and longshots (Mulmore) that never really was all that good. We lost Copeland mid-season, and we knew we would be losing Hayes, Cameron, and Pryor. Yet we only had a 2-person recruiting class (and the better of those two is now gone). And Mourning seems to be gone, and there are rumors of other players thinking about leaving. Former players are tweeting things like "Daddy's boy...SMH" and "Must be karma" after we lose games. The athletic department brushes off fan base on a regular basis, and alienates some of their strongest supporters in the process. The fan base is Editeded, and rightly so. If this is about NCAA underachievement, Tommy Amaker has made the second week of the NCAA tournament once. 17 years ago. Bill Clinton was President. I'm making no argument that the roster this year wasn't a haphazard mess. Whoever coaches next year has to clean this up by focusing long-term and not recruiting 2 star Isaac Kantes. This is going to be a roster rebuild. My argument is that the coaches you could replace him with are not as good as him, and we place the program in financial straits trying to replace him, because of a fanbase whose expectations aren't really aligned with reality. That's dumb.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2017 9:56:09 GMT -5
But when it's all said and done, no matter who else is on the market, I feel like it's reached a point where JT3 just isn't the right coach for this program anymore. Sometimes that happens. We've seen a decade of NCAA underachievement, bolstering ourselves with the memories of fun regular seasons. The first four seasons in the New Big East have been a disaster for one of the flagship programs that was supposed to lead the conference going forward. There's really no other way to frame it - while Villanova has stepped up and won a goddam National Championship, we're losing at home to DePaul and going home from the BET on Wednesday nights. Players who were supposed to be the foundation of this team will finish their college careers in Oregon and Nebraska. This year's roster included a jerry-rigged mess of late arrivals (Pryor), never-thought-he'd-be-heres (Hayes) and longshots (Mulmore) that never really was all that good. We lost Copeland mid-season, and we knew we would be losing Hayes, Cameron, and Pryor. Yet we only had a 2-person recruiting class (and the better of those two is now gone). And Mourning seems to be gone, and there are rumors of other players thinking about leaving. Former players are tweeting things like "Daddy's boy...SMH" and "Must be karma" after we lose games. The athletic department brushes off fan base on a regular basis, and alienates some of their strongest supporters in the process. The fan base is Editeded, and rightly so. If this is about NCAA underachievement, Tommy Amaker has made the second week of the NCAA tournament once. 17 years ago. Bill Clinton was President. I'm making no argument that the roster this year wasn't a haphazard mess. Whoever coaches next year has to clean this up by focusing long-term and not recruiting 2 star Isaac Kantes. This is going to be a roster rebuild. My argument is that the coaches you could replace him with are not as good as him, and we place the program in financial straits trying to replace him, because of a fanbase whose expectations aren't really aligned with reality. That's dumb. Expectations not aligned with reality? We just watched Villanova win a national championship and get the #1 overall seed the following year. And we struggle to even stay out of the Wednesday games at the BET. I'm not saying that we should be at Nova's level, but there's a wide swath of reality-based middle ground. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect us to be able to finish in the top half of this conference and actually make the NCAAs more than once every four years. And I'm not advocating for Amaker, although he only has one fewer NCAA tournament win than JT3 in the last 9 seasons (Fun with Arbitrary Endpoints!), despite coaching in a one-bid league. I'm not advocating for anyone specific - I'm simply pointing out that we have a toxic culture, and I don't believe that the person responsible for creating that culture is also the best person to get us out of it. Imagine working in a company with the following: 1. A CEO whose father had been the CEO for many years. 2. The father/previous CEO having no official title, but having strong sway over the Board of Directors. 3. People who were brought in with high expectations not performing, and then leaving for other companies relatively quickly. One (who was supposed to be a huge asset going forward) even decided to look for other jobs before even coming on board. 4. People who leave the place publicly mock the CEO and the company for its failures after they're gone. 5. People who worked at the place years ago talk about the negative impact of the father's ongoing influence. 6. They recently hired the son of one of your great employees from two decades ago (who was a star employee under the CEO's father), and the son decides it's probably better to bounce. 7. They're hemorrhaging staff members, but can only find temp help and underqualified help - and not nearly enough of them. 8. They're hemorrhaging and alienating long-time customers. And aren't doing anything to convince new customers to come on board. Sounds like an awful corporate culture to me. At some point, it becomes short sighted to argue that we can't possibly think of changing the CEO because a) we can't find anyone better and b) the cost of change is prohibitive. At some point, the cost of keeping that CEO may exceed the potential cost of replacing him.
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Mar 17, 2017 10:00:16 GMT -5
Except we are not talking about a company, and a college basketball program should not be run in any respect the same way as a for-profit corporate endeavor. And in other respects the comparison does not work. For instance, fans are not the same as customers on any level.
No disrespect- the post was well reasoned, but I simply believe the comparison does not work. Others surely will disagree.
|
|