I don't think the coaching search is just a MSU problem

[Irondawg]

somehow SC did a great job in getting Martin, but look at the Illinois hire and I consider that a very good job as well. Let's face it, for some reason mid-major coaches that have had some success are very reluctant to just jump ship even if it means 3x the salary. I find it a bit odd as well, but that's what is happening. <div>
</div><div>Either they are quite happy to get paid $300K+ at a much lower stress school or they think they can hold out and get a really premier job - but the truth is those jobs don't come up often.</div><div>
</div><div>There's no doubt in my mind that MSU is a top 40 job. Maybe not Top 25, but still attractive enough to draw interest from a number of potentially very good coaches. The facilities, fan support and recruiting base without another perennial top 25 program is the area make it attractive.</div><div>
</div><div>I also think basketball coaches are tough to evaluate - for instance the body of work outside the NCAA tournament for guys like Groce and Shaka were nothing spectacular. I'm not saying they're bad coaches, but there are alot of mid major guys with similar resumes if you exclude the NCAA ( I know for some people this is all that matters).</div><div>
</div><div>I still hold to my guns that first and foremost we need to find a recruiter type that commands respect ( this is really Calipari's 2 strengths). Find another recruiter-type assistant and then hire a couple of great X and O guys (there are plenty of those guys who can't recruit and thus will never land a HC job).</div><div>
</div><div>The game is first and foremost about talent and then making sure you get the most out of that talent.</div>

 

[studentdawg87]

I'm far from happy with the way our coaching search has "progressed",but there is no denying a significant shift has taken place when it comes to how current mid-major coaches view bigger jobs that are open. In the last three years or so, it seems as if more and more mid-major coaches are electing to remain at their respective schools and continue building on what they have already built or are building.

I think some of this has to do with basketball rosters being so small. In football, it is extremely hard for a coach at a smaller school to consistently field teams capable of beating the "big boys." With the exception of TCU and Boise State, that is. However, it is far easier for a coach at a mid-major to build a program up to a level where they can start landing players that have offers from high-major programs. I'm not sure if Stevens will be able to lure such players to Butler, but I bet Shaka will be able to soon. Mark Few has been doing it for years at Gonzaga, and Randy Bennett has had some talented players come through St. Mary's in his time there. Also, it doesn't seem as if mid-major coaches have to "play the game" as much as coaches in a major conference. Not only are their players most likely going to play there for four years, but they most likely won't have to deal with as many "pre-madonnas."

Lastly, could it be that schools like Murray State, Wichita State, VCU, Butler and etc. simply care more about basketball and allow coaches a better chance to win consistently than a lower-level high-major program? I wouldn't be surprised if coaches view most SEC programs as coaching graveyards.

 

[dawgs.sixpack]

<div>
</div><div>Either they are quite happy to get paid $300K+ at a much lower stress school or they think they can hold out and get a really premier job - but the truth is those jobs don't come up often.</div><div></div>

most of the mid-major HCs we would want make far more than $300K. vcu pays shaka more than we paid stans. pretty sure the same story with stevens at butler and few at gonzaga. the missouri valley schools (whichita st, creighton) pay pretty well too if they have a good coach.

 

[BiscuitEater]

br>
Lastly, could it be that schools like Murray State, Wichita State, VCU, Butler and etc. simply care more about basketball and allow coaches a better chance to win consistently than a lower-level high-major program? I wouldn't be surprised if coaches view most SEC programs as coaching graveyards.

I have posted this over and over again ...


Smart has NEVER even considering coming to State. Period. VCU is in the CAA and plays ... Delaware, Drexel, George Mason, Georgia State, Hofstra, James Madison, Northeastern, Old Dominion Towson, North Carolina Wilmington, & William & Mary.


VCU is a 'city' school, doesn't play football and they focus on basketball. They have a great recruiting area & have a good rep. Statistically, they have a better chance of getting to the 'dance' than most SEC teams not named Kentucky.


So, Smart would leave a school where he is the "Nick Saben" kinda coach to come to a school with the smallest basketball budget of the 14 teams? One with second or third smallest arenas?

 

[MaroonedNdaRock]

Good, sensible thread.

 

[patdog]

<div>I still hold to my guns that first and foremost we need to find a recruiter type that commands respect ( this is really Calipari's 2 strengths). Find another recruiter-type assistant and then hire a couple of great X and O guys (there are plenty of those guys who can't recruit and thus will never land a HC job).</div><div>
</div><div>The game is first and foremost about talent and then making sure you get the most out of that talent.</div>

This is really what it's all about. Stansfailed at the getting themost out of that talent part of the equation the last several years.

 

[DerHntr]

no football, city school, good recruiting base, pays well, etc.

 

[mstateglfr]

What statistics?

3 CAA teams have even made it to the dance in the last 5 seasons. It's usually a 1 or 2 bid league out of 11.
Yes VCU has been good in the last decade, but they have made it 5 times in that period.

In a 1 or maybe 2 bid conference, you better be lights out good otherwise it's NIT time. That doesn't make for a good statistical chance.