|
Post by hibernatinghoyafan on Nov 30, 2022 21:59:22 GMT -5
We would literally all be laughing if Ewing was employed at a different program, especially one that was a national powerhouse only 19 years ago, so it’s humorous when people try to defend him.
Hell, I was back on the bandwagon full stop about a month ago. With a borderline, top 25 roster, the man is going to take us to another last place BE finish.
It is asinine for people to be morally against Pitino. We watch this team and are diehards of the program because the team is good. That’s it, full stop. That’s the only thing that matters. Hire Pitino, then we have a chance. If not, a large percentage of the fan base isn’t coming back.
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Dec 1, 2022 9:17:02 GMT -5
Dennis Gates should have been the coach. Ties to AD. Experience, has a vision. Oh well.
|
|
bluegray79
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,091
|
Post by bluegray79 on Dec 1, 2022 10:03:19 GMT -5
i really liked Gates last time we went through our own candidate search here in HoyaTalk.
A few posters have hit on it: a coach is a teacher. Or the best coaches are good teachers. Therefore they are students of the game. They are experts in their field, they know their subject matter/sport, and they work on the craft of delivering it to their students/players. We know what happens when one of those aspects is lacking: a teacher/coach who doesn't know their stuff is doomed, and a teacher/coach who doesn't tend to the delivery of that info -- in an atmosphere/culture that supports and develops -- is also doomed.
The job is not easy, and it's not for everyone.
|
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,480
|
Post by Elvado on Dec 1, 2022 10:19:09 GMT -5
i really liked Gates last time we went through our own candidate search here in HoyaTalk. A few posters have hit on it: a coach is a teacher. Or the best coaches are good teachers. Therefore they are students of the game. They are experts in their field, they know their subject matter/sport, and they work on the craft of delivering it to their students/players. We know what happens when one of those aspects is lacking: a teacher/coach who doesn't know their stuff is doomed, and a teacher/coach who doesn't tend to the delivery of that info -- in an atmosphere/culture that supports and develops -- is also doomed. The job is not easy, and it's not for everyone. See, eg, Ewing, Patrick
|
|
|
Post by BeantownHoya on Dec 1, 2022 11:40:12 GMT -5
I have seen mentioned here multiple times that you need a marquee name, a proven track record, etc - because the next coach has to work out.
Honestly all that matters is we win. Say we had gone with Gates and he did exactly what he is doing at Mizzou and we are 7-0 right now. No one at that point gives a sh!t what his name is, where he comes from, etc - just moving this program in the right direction is needed from the next hire.
I say this for me personally and maybe the last 5+ years has put my bar too low but if you told me the new coach in their first 5 years went to the dance 3 of those years, made the second weekend once, finishes in the top half of the BE every year, top 75 Kenpom/rpi - I would absolutely take that right now.
I don't need championships all I want is to enjoy watching Gtown bball again. If that is a bunch of 20-10 seasons, some exciting games in February, a run in the BE tournament every other year and see their name called on the 7-10 line on selection Sunday I would take that in a heartbeat compared to where we are today.
|
|
SDHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,327
|
Post by SDHoya on Dec 1, 2022 12:22:40 GMT -5
If Ewing had scheduled an OOC as weak as what Gates has had (at least through the first 8 games) at Mizzou, Hoyatalkers would have a conniption.
|
|
hoyaboya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,261
|
Post by hoyaboya on Dec 1, 2022 12:35:41 GMT -5
If Ewing had scheduled an OOC as weak as what Gates has had (at least through the first 8 games) at Mizzou, Hoyatalkers would have a conniption. While I'm certainly not ready to crown Dennis Gates as the next great thing in coaching, Mizzou's upcoming OOC games against Kansas and Illinois are far stronger than any two contests on our OOC schedule.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Dec 1, 2022 12:37:18 GMT -5
If Ewing had scheduled an OOC as weak as what Gates has had (at least through the first 8 games) at Mizzou, Hoyatalkers would have a conniption. It's true that Missouri's schedule is fairly weak, but they do at least have good games against teams ranked 16, 17, 72, and 88. All of which are respectable. Even 168 (Penn) 199 (Southern Indiana), 207 (Costal Carolina) and 227 (SIU Edwardsville) are respectable, if not great teams. The real stinkers Gates scheduled are Southeast Missori State (278), Houston Christian (335), Lindenwood (341), Missippi Valley State (361). While I wouldn't be happy with the schedule, Georgetown's OOC schedule is still ranked worse, for what it's worth. And Gates is a better coach than Ewing, so we'd have that too.
|
|
RBHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,124
|
Post by RBHoya on Dec 1, 2022 12:38:35 GMT -5
I have seen mentioned here multiple times that you need a marquee name, a proven track record, etc - because the next coach has to work out. Honestly all that matters is we win. Say we had gone with Gates and he did exactly what he is doing at Mizzou and we are 7-0 right now. No one at that point gives a sh!t what his name is, where he comes from, etc - just moving this program in the right direction is needed from the next hire. I say this for me personally and maybe the last 5+ years has put my bar too low but if you told me the new coach in their first 5 years went to the dance 3 of those years, made the second weekend once, finishes in the top half of the BE every year, top 75 Kenpom/rpi - I would absolutely take that right now. I don't need championships all I want is to enjoy watching Gtown bball again. If that is a bunch of 20-10 seasons, some exciting games in February, a run in the BE tournament every other year and see their name called on the 7-10 line on selection Sunday I would take that in a heartbeat compared to where we are today. No doubt. I was on the Gates bandwagon last off-season also. It isn't that I want a "name" coach, it's just that if you're hiring somebody who is less of a known commodity, there's more risk that it doesn't work. Every year there are hot mid major coaches or big name assistants who get hired and can't make it work at the high major level. Off the top of my head from the last 20 years or so in the Big East, you had Rutgers hiring Mike Rice (hot mid major off a tournament run at Robert Morris) and Fred Hill (hotshot BE assistant and supposed elite recruiter), Seton Hall hiring Bobby Gonzalez (hot assistant at Manhattan), Providence hiring Keno Davis (hot assistant in the MVC), Marquette hiring Wojo (highly regarded assistant), etc. It happens every year to some schools across the country. Last time around a lot of people wanted Kevin Keatts, a hot young assistant from the CAA, and his tenure at NC State so far has been underwhelming. That's not to say that hiring a coach from a major conference guarantees you anything either. Whether a school hires a coach who is actively in another high major conference (Stallings to Pitt, Purnell to Depaul, Turgeon to Maryland etc.) or a school is hiring a coach who had success at one or more high majors but is currently unemployed (Lavin to St. Johns, Crean to Georgia, etc.) we've seen that go poorly too. I think there is risk in any coaching hire. Some candidates have high ceilings and low floors, some have high floors and low ceilings, and some are in the middle. My only point on that topic is, it would be great to have a next hire whose floor is not too low. Because I don't think any of us can take another 4 years of this. If we stink for 4 more years, we'll become even more "Depaul" than we already are. To your point, if there's somebody out there who we knew could bring us back to respectability and national relevance, sign him up. And if he retires in a few years and we have to do a coaching search again, that's ok. But we *NEED* this next hire to take us back to respectability. Ewing was a high ceiling/low floor candidate because if it worked and you had a HOFer and proud son running the program, it would be a huge story and kids would be lining up to play for him. That hasn't come to pass, and we're in the midst of seeing just how low that floor is. For the next hire, we can't afford a big gamble that could again blow up. We need somebody who we KNOW (at least as much as possible) is a quality college basketball coach who will success at this level. A mid-major guy with 1-2 good years on his resume MIGHT be that guy, but there's also a chance he got lucky with a recruit or two that carried him to that success and it won't translate at his next job. We just need to be really careful, and if there are relatively proven commodities out there who we can get, that should be the first choice.
|
|
SDHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,327
|
Post by SDHoya on Dec 1, 2022 13:42:38 GMT -5
If Ewing had scheduled an OOC as weak as what Gates has had (at least through the first 8 games) at Mizzou, Hoyatalkers would have a conniption. It's true that Missouri's schedule is fairly weak, but they do at least have good games against teams ranked 16, 17, 72, and 88. All of which are respectable. Even 168 (Penn) 199 (Southern Indiana), 207 (Costal Carolina) and 227 (SIU Edwardsville) are respectable, if not great teams. The real stinkers Gates scheduled are Southeast Missori State (278), Houston Christian (335), Lindenwood (341), Missippi Valley State (361). While I wouldn't be happy with the schedule, Georgetown's OOC schedule is still ranked worse, for what it's worth. And Gates is a better coach than Ewing, so we'd have that too. I am only referring to Mizzou's schedule so far. If the Hoyas went 8-0 on the same schedule, no one aside from the most ardent Ewing supporters would be declaring the Ewing era redeemed. There is plenty of evidence that a coaching change should have been made. Missouri beating up on a terrible early season schedule isn't evidence of anything.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,271
|
Post by prhoya on Dec 1, 2022 14:22:25 GMT -5
I have seen mentioned here multiple times that you need a marquee name, a proven track record, etc - because the next coach has to work out. Honestly all that matters is we win. Say we had gone with Gates and he did exactly what he is doing at Mizzou and we are 7-0 right now. No one at that point gives a sh!t what his name is, where he comes from, etc - just moving this program in the right direction is needed from the next hire. I say this for me personally and maybe the last 5+ years has put my bar too low but if you told me the new coach in their first 5 years went to the dance 3 of those years, made the second weekend once, finishes in the top half of the BE every year, top 75 Kenpom/rpi - I would absolutely take that right now. I don't need championships all I want is to enjoy watching Gtown bball again. If that is a bunch of 20-10 seasons, some exciting games in February, a run in the BE tournament every other year and see their name called on the 7-10 line on selection Sunday I would take that in a heartbeat compared to where we are today. No doubt. I was on the Gates bandwagon last off-season also. It isn't that I want a "name" coach, it's just that if you're hiring somebody who is less of a known commodity, there's more risk that it doesn't work. Every year there are hot mid major coaches or big name assistants who get hired and can't make it work at the high major level. Off the top of my head from the last 20 years or so in the Big East, you had Rutgers hiring Mike Rice (hot mid major off a tournament run at Robert Morris) and Fred Hill (hotshot BE assistant and supposed elite recruiter), Seton Hall hiring Bobby Gonzalez (hot assistant at Manhattan), Providence hiring Keno Davis (hot assistant in the MVC), Marquette hiring Wojo (highly regarded assistant), etc. It happens every year to some schools across the country. Last time around a lot of people wanted Kevin Keatts, a hot young assistant from the CAA, and his tenure at NC State so far has been underwhelming. That's not to say that hiring a coach from a major conference guarantees you anything either. Whether a school hires a coach who is actively in another high major conference (Stallings to Pitt, Purnell to Depaul, Turgeon to Maryland etc.) or a school is hiring a coach who had success at one or more high majors but is currently unemployed (Lavin to St. Johns, Crean to Georgia, etc.) we've seen that go poorly too. I think there is risk in any coaching hire. Some candidates have high ceilings and low floors, some have high floors and low ceilings, and some are in the middle. My only point on that topic is, it would be great to have a next hire whose floor is not too low. Because I don't think any of us can take another 4 years of this. If we stink for 4 more years, we'll become even more "Depaul" than we already are. To your point, if there's somebody out there who we knew could bring us back to respectability and national relevance, sign him up. And if he retires in a few years and we have to do a coaching search again, that's ok. But we *NEED* this next hire to take us back to respectability. Ewing was a high ceiling/low floor candidate because if it worked and you had a HOFer and proud son running the program, it would be a huge story and kids would be lining up to play for him. That hasn't come to pass, and we're in the midst of seeing just how low that floor is. For the next hire, we can't afford a big gamble that could again blow up. We need somebody who we KNOW (at least as much as possible) is a quality college basketball coach who will success at this level. A mid-major guy with 1-2 good years on his resume MIGHT be that guy, but there's also a chance he got lucky with a recruit or two that carried him to that success and it won't translate at his next job. We just need to be really careful, and if there are relatively proven commodities out there who we can get, that should be the first choice. Georgetown should spare no expense in the head coach search, just like we spare no expense in our basketball budget.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Dec 1, 2022 14:47:01 GMT -5
It's true that Missouri's schedule is fairly weak, but they do at least have good games against teams ranked 16, 17, 72, and 88. All of which are respectable. Even 168 (Penn) 199 (Southern Indiana), 207 (Costal Carolina) and 227 (SIU Edwardsville) are respectable, if not great teams. The real stinkers Gates scheduled are Southeast Missori State (278), Houston Christian (335), Lindenwood (341), Missippi Valley State (361). While I wouldn't be happy with the schedule, Georgetown's OOC schedule is still ranked worse, for what it's worth. And Gates is a better coach than Ewing, so we'd have that too. I am only referring to Mizzou's schedule so far. If the Hoyas went 8-0 on the same schedule, no one aside from the most ardent Ewing supporters would be declaring the Ewing era redeemed. There is plenty of evidence that a coaching change should have been made. Missouri beating up on a terrible early season schedule isn't evidence of anything. Got it, and I see your point. I think the folks that are anointing Gates as a winner and extolling his virtues are premature, but there are definitely good signs. The win against Wichita State (ranked 88) is actually pretty good since it was an away game in Wichita, but otherwise, they really aren't tested. That said, there are a lot of good things like like about Gates' team so far. They have the 14th best offense in the country (averaging 1.13 points per possession), they are 9th in effective field goal, they are 24 in not turning it over, they are a very good offensive rebounding team, their two point shooting percentage is insanely good (63.4%), though possibly artificially high because of the poor competition, and they shoot threes okay (34.1%). The people here who like a fast pace would love Gates too, they have the 8th fastest tempo in the country. On defense, they are great at steals (best in the country), pretty good on blocks (66th in the country), and their two point defense is pretty good too. They've gotten massively unlucky in that opponents are shooting 78.5 against them from the line. While Missouri's defense is only ranked 92 overall, there are some signs of life there. Right now, they are really bad at rebounding on the defensive end, and they don't get to the line much on the offensive line, getting very few points out of free throws. Most importantly, he's so far a huge improvement on Cuonzo Martin, especially last year. Missouri last year was ranked 137, with 153 ranked offense and 138 defense. Gates' team is ranked 37, 14th in offense, and 92 defense. This just confirms what I have been saying all along. A really good coach could whip our team into shape really fast. The idea that starting over again requires a multi-year rebuild is really a thing of the past, and also ignores that we really do have some nice pieces, if a new coach could retain them.
|
|
hoyaroc
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,324
|
Post by hoyaroc on Dec 1, 2022 15:13:08 GMT -5
It's true that Missouri's schedule is fairly weak, but they do at least have good games against teams ranked 16, 17, 72, and 88. All of which are respectable. Even 168 (Penn) 199 (Southern Indiana), 207 (Costal Carolina) and 227 (SIU Edwardsville) are respectable, if not great teams. The real stinkers Gates scheduled are Southeast Missori State (278), Houston Christian (335), Lindenwood (341), Missippi Valley State (361). While I wouldn't be happy with the schedule, Georgetown's OOC schedule is still ranked worse, for what it's worth. And Gates is a better coach than Ewing, so we'd have that too. I am only referring to Mizzou's schedule so far. If the Hoyas went 8-0 on the same schedule, no one aside from the most ardent Ewing supporters would be declaring the Ewing era redeemed. There is plenty of evidence that a coaching change should have been made. Missouri beating up on a terrible early season schedule isn't evidence of anything. I notice that when someone says anything in defense of Ewing the wolves come out against them. Don’t be a coward stick to your point of view. 😂
|
|
bigskyhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,094
|
Post by bigskyhoya on Dec 1, 2022 15:26:44 GMT -5
I am only referring to Mizzou's schedule so far. If the Hoyas went 8-0 on the same schedule, no one aside from the most ardent Ewing supporters would be declaring the Ewing era redeemed. There is plenty of evidence that a coaching change should have been made. Missouri beating up on a terrible early season schedule isn't evidence of anything. I notice that when someone says anything in defense of Ewing the wolves come out against them. Don’t be a coward stick to your point of view. 😂 If that poster said something good about Ewing, I missed it. In fact, I haven't seen much of anything positive said, even from your camp. I have heard reasons/excuses why it is premature to judge Ewing, or that the Hoyas are our team, good or bad, etc, but no full throated defense. Want to be the first to try it?
|
|
cas92
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 290
|
Post by cas92 on Dec 1, 2022 15:29:10 GMT -5
I am only referring to Mizzou's schedule so far. If the Hoyas went 8-0 on the same schedule, no one aside from the most ardent Ewing supporters would be declaring the Ewing era redeemed. There is plenty of evidence that a coaching change should have been made. Missouri beating up on a terrible early season schedule isn't evidence of anything. Got it, and I see your point. I think the folks that are anointing Gates as a winner and extolling his virtues are premature, but there are definitely good signs. The win against Wichita State (ranked 88) is actually pretty good since it was an away game in Wichita, but otherwise, they really aren't tested. That said, there are a lot of good things like like about Gates' team so far. They have the 14th best offense in the country (averaging 1.13 points per possession), they are 9th in effective field goal, they are 24 in not turning it over, they are a very good offensive rebounding team, their two point shooting percentage is insanely good (63.4%), though possibly artificially high because of the poor competition, and they shoot threes okay (34.1%). The people here who like a fast pace would love Gates too, they have the 8th fastest tempo in the country. On defense, they are great at steals (best in the country), pretty good on blocks (66th in the country), and their two point defense is pretty good too. They've gotten massively unlucky in that opponents are shooting 78.5 against them from the line. While Missouri's defense is only ranked 92 overall, there are some signs of life there. Right now, they are really bad at rebounding on the defensive end, and they don't get to the line much on the offensive line, getting very few points out of free throws. Most importantly, he's so far a huge improvement on Cuonzo Martin, especially last year. Missouri last year was ranked 137, with 153 ranked offense and 138 defense. Gates' team is ranked 37, 14th in offense, and 92 defense. This just confirms what I have been saying all along. A really good coach could whip our team into shape really fast. The idea that starting over again requires a multi-year rebuild is really a thing of the past, and also ignores that we really do have some nice pieces, if a new coach could retain them. They're also first overall in assists; defensively, they've played mostly man to man (occasional switching), relying primarily on a rotation of 6' 7" to 6' 8" personnel to man the post (the 6' 10" JuCo transfer Diarra apparently is extremely raw so they've mostly given him spot minutes here and there). Down 10 in the 2nd half to Wichita State, there wasn't any obvious panic from the coaching staff nor the players on the floor - just a methodical chipping away @ the deficit to get into a manageable (and winnable) contest late in the game.
|
|
alleninxis
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,216
|
Post by alleninxis on Dec 1, 2022 18:00:40 GMT -5
The thing about Gates - was he ENTERED last season as a potentially really good candidate - that could have made a case to make leap the year prior, in 2021. He had already done his time on a bench at a P5 school and took a mid-major program and turned it around immediately.
I am very much in a position now that we can not take a gamble on a candidate if this job opens this season. Why? The candidates, who you would hope resemble Gates, do not exist this cycle.
Kim English and his program have only regressed from the first week he coached last November. Nolan Smith might have lit his coaching career on fire. Drew Valentine and Loyola are on the brink of something really...not good. Shaheen Holloway is gone. Todd Golden is gone. Jay Wright handpicked Neptune.
What I would consider feeder conferences to a place with the footprint of the Big East -- A10, Patriot League, MAAC, Ivy, America East - unless you're bullish on Matt Langel, it is slim pickings out there. (I actually think Chris Markwood is the most interesting young candidate in any of those leagues, but he's just starting off at Maine. Another name is Darris Nichols at Radford, but like Markwood there's a progression there that is not Radford >> Big East - the other name is Grasso but I don't think you could find an odder fit for Georgetown, it's like Bobby Gonzalez in 2004. Ditto for Pat Kesley although less Bobby G and more...well, just another annoying Xavier guy)
So, I get the desire of a young coach to pump in some energy to this program. We really need it, but we very well may have missed our turn. Someone may emerge, maybe Langel wins the Patriot League again and makes noise in March, who knows. But we lost out on some really good choices - and those that stayed put, are failing. And if you're not hiring a head coach - say it's Mike Jones - you BETTER get that hire right or your program will officially be dead. So if you don't have the stomach for Pitino, I think you end up in the Mark Schmidt, Steve Pikiell, James Jones, Mike Brey echelon of coaches - fine, stable - will bring respectability but the home run hire (or the upside of such) will be tough to find this year when there were multiple possibilities last spring.
|
|
hoyaguy
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,848
|
Post by hoyaguy on Dec 1, 2022 19:31:08 GMT -5
The thing about Gates - was he ENTERED last season as a potentially really good candidate - that could have made a case to make leap the year prior, in 2021. He had already done his time on a bench at a P5 school and took a mid-major program and turned it around immediately. I am very much in a position now that we can not take a gamble on a candidate if this job opens this season. Why? The candidates, who you would hope resemble Gates, do not exist this cycle. Kim English and his program have only regressed from the first week he coached last November. Nolan Smith might have lit his coaching career on fire. Drew Valentine and Loyola are on the brink of something really...not good. Shaheen Holloway is gone. Todd Golden is gone. Jay Wright handpicked Neptune. What I would consider feeder conferences to a place with the footprint of the Big East -- A10, Patriot League, MAAC, Ivy, America East - unless you're bullish on Matt Langel, it is slim pickings out there. (I actually think Chris Markwood is the most interesting young candidate in any of those leagues, but he's just starting off at Maine. Another name is Darris Nichols at Radford, but like Markwood there's a progression there that is not Radford >> Big East - the other name is Grasso but I don't think you could find an odder fit for Georgetown, it's like Bobby Gonzalez in 2004. Ditto for Pat Kesley although less Bobby G and more...well, just another annoying Xavier guy) So, I get the desire of a young coach to pump in some energy to this program. We really need it, but we very well may have missed our turn. Someone may emerge, maybe Langel wins the Patriot League again and makes noise in March, who knows. But we lost out on some really good choices - and those that stayed put, are failing. And if you're not hiring a head coach - say it's Mike Jones - you BETTER get that hire right or your program will officially be dead. So if you don't have the stomach for Pitino, I think you end up in the Mark Schmidt, Steve Pikiell, James Jones, Mike Brey echelon of coaches - fine, stable - will bring respectability but the home run hire (or the upside of such) will be tough to find this year when there were multiple possibilities last spring. What do you think of McCasland?
|
|
alleninxis
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,216
|
Post by alleninxis on Dec 1, 2022 19:39:22 GMT -5
Tactically it'd be a total 180 from where we are now, I think it's become pretty consensus that he is masterful in that regard. I just don't know how much of a fit he is out of Big 12/SEC country, seems outside of the box for this administration. And I would care less than others, but anyone who thought JTIII needed to play faster on offense probably wouldn't be a fan. (Although at this point I'm sure all of use would trade style of play just for competence and some wins)
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Dec 1, 2022 19:39:33 GMT -5
Meanwhile, Dan Hurley has UConn in the top-10 and rolling. ☹️
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Dec 1, 2022 21:17:29 GMT -5
Meanwhile, Dan Hurley has UConn in the top-10 and rolling. ☹️ And we did not even interview him because John Thompson and DeGioia had to anoint their favorite son, instead. That’s worked out well.
|
|