I was hoping for a name coach who could Jump start the program. I know that's unrealistic for Rutgers but its what we need to do eventually. How many coaches do we have to hire from the tiny schools and minor league conferences before we learn that it doesn't cut it? Mike Rice came from the power house Robert Morris for christ's sake! Now we are in the B!G and taking a crap shoot with a new coach from powerhouse Stony Brook.. The formula doesn't work here. I'm very disappointed but hope that we finally get lucky and nail it with this hire.
Poll: Your thoughts on the Pikiell Hire
- Thread starter MadRU
- Start date
Although I have to say I was intrigued by some of the big names like Dawkins, and also with the Hawaii coach, I'm good with Pikiell (I'm sure he's thrilled to hear that).
I think we dodged a major bullet in Hurley, but that's a different thread.
Upsides on Pikiell:
1. Willing to take on the task.
2. Appears to be a "get to the gym before everybody else and be the last one to leave" kind of a guy (key ingredient for Hobbs, and what we have in Ash).
3. Strength is in actually coaching the game at the college level. This is key. Think about it. Right now we basically have the team we are going to have for the next two years. If Pikiell is going to make a move early, it will be through coaching the guys he has.
4. He is a high character, high quality guy.
5. Seems to be a players' coach.
6. Has some high level recruiting experience.
7. People who know Pikiell are very positive on the hire. Could just be people who like him, but it is encouraging.
Downsides on Pikiell:
1. We made less of a splash than a female high diver from the Chinese Olympic team.
2. He's not the coach from Hawaii whom I really wanted (OK, not really fair).
3. Only HC experience is on the lower end of mid.
4. He looks like the nice guy he probably is.
To me, he nets out as a "good looking hire with lots of upside, we'll see."
I don't buy any of the "nobody would ever come here" argument. I think (no info here) that Hobbs was looking for one kind of guy: young, high energy, incredibly detail-oriented, knowledgeable high quality and character up and comer. This is the same as for the football hire. He wasn't looking for a guy with a lot of high level experience who was just fired from his previous job. He also appears to put a lot of weight on the interview. That isn't always the best person for the actual job, but in addition to record, it is all you have to go on.
I'm with Choppin' on this one. I might have had a different first choice, but Pikiell was definitely on my "hireable" list, and he's now our coach, so I am 100% behind him. Can't wait to see the press conference and what he does first.
I think we dodged a major bullet in Hurley, but that's a different thread.
Upsides on Pikiell:
1. Willing to take on the task.
2. Appears to be a "get to the gym before everybody else and be the last one to leave" kind of a guy (key ingredient for Hobbs, and what we have in Ash).
3. Strength is in actually coaching the game at the college level. This is key. Think about it. Right now we basically have the team we are going to have for the next two years. If Pikiell is going to make a move early, it will be through coaching the guys he has.
4. He is a high character, high quality guy.
5. Seems to be a players' coach.
6. Has some high level recruiting experience.
7. People who know Pikiell are very positive on the hire. Could just be people who like him, but it is encouraging.
Downsides on Pikiell:
1. We made less of a splash than a female high diver from the Chinese Olympic team.
2. He's not the coach from Hawaii whom I really wanted (OK, not really fair).
3. Only HC experience is on the lower end of mid.
4. He looks like the nice guy he probably is.
To me, he nets out as a "good looking hire with lots of upside, we'll see."
I don't buy any of the "nobody would ever come here" argument. I think (no info here) that Hobbs was looking for one kind of guy: young, high energy, incredibly detail-oriented, knowledgeable high quality and character up and comer. This is the same as for the football hire. He wasn't looking for a guy with a lot of high level experience who was just fired from his previous job. He also appears to put a lot of weight on the interview. That isn't always the best person for the actual job, but in addition to record, it is all you have to go on.
I'm with Choppin' on this one. I might have had a different first choice, but Pikiell was definitely on my "hireable" list, and he's now our coach, so I am 100% behind him. Can't wait to see the press conference and what he does first.
So your solution was to hire fired coaches?
Their are two major ingredients to winning: talented players and good coaching, this goes for all levels, it appears that our new coach is a good fundamental coach, recruiting at the level needed to be competitive in the BIG is an open question that will be answered over time. Initially I will be satisfied to watch some good fundamental basketball and see what happens with recruiting the necessary talent.
Had he not beat Vermont 2 weeks ago he would not be in the conversation.
He was stuck at Stony Brook for ELEVEN years. Only 1 championship.
Why are we paying him so much?
On paper this looks like a pathetic hire. Unfortunately it matches the attractiveness of our program.
Hope I am wrong here.
He was stuck at Stony Brook for ELEVEN years. Only 1 championship.
Why are we paying him so much?
On paper this looks like a pathetic hire. Unfortunately it matches the attractiveness of our program.
Hope I am wrong here.
Great post and thanks for giving your perspective. I always sit up and take notice when you post
Hobbs won't be hiring the staff. Pikiell hires his own staff. The only question is how much money it will take to hire top notch assistant coaches. It may not matter much if Pckiell is bringing his assistants with him.
Bannon, Waters, and Rice all could coach, all had some success, but all ultimately failed. At least we are back in the game. We were never going anywhere with the previous staff.
I think he had 4 American East regular season titles and just this season won the Conference tourney as well.
As for 11 seasons there, first 3 were trying to make a go of the program (NCAA sanctions due to a low APR just before he was hired)
Stony Brook under him took time to become a good program and he started winning in his 4th year there, It would take a couple of years of winning at a program like the Seahawks have to start getting noticed by the bigger programs.
Making his 11 years at Stony really not an indictment on his coaching, but one on how hard it is to be noticed when you're program has just started winning at the level Stony Brook is at.
5 straight years with 20 or more wins and 6 of the last 7 having 20 ( 15-17 in 2010-11) killed the 7 straight .
So with that in mind, don't think Pikiell was a reach, just not someone whose name and resume is one that spells instant success, but points towards a success career at RU .
Funny. And if negative = realistic, then I'm all for it! Funny how so many posters around here still haven't learned that despite being at rock bottom for a decade now. And all 19 of those likes came in the past few days when I resurfaced on the board for the first time in years. Those 19,000 posts came from 2002-2008, mostly, long before the like system was in place.
I can vouch for RUFAN4LIFE. He was one of the original board members and was very involved with the board and at games. He was vested like many of us. He stepped away, probably for sanity reasons...I thought about doing it myself many times.
Trust me when I tell you, he is as big a Rutgers fan as there is. Like he said, the like option is new, and his 19,000 posts were from years ago. No correlation.
Trust me when I tell you, he is as big a Rutgers fan as there is. Like he said, the like option is new, and his 19,000 posts were from years ago. No correlation.
Not that I need vouching but thanks. Let's hope that Pikiell starts a new era of RU hoops that's worth watching and following. Since Rutgers is Rutgers, I'm incredibly skeptical, but this IS better than what we've had, that's for sure.
Well, then I take it back, lol, jk. Hope all is well with you, and hope for a better era of Rutgers basketball for all of us.
Very reasoned response with the plus and minus sides mentioned in regard to this hire.The missing link still remains which is recruiting higher caliber players.I have serious doubts that this hire will change the status quo in recruiting but time will tell who is right.
Looks like the ideal coach for the anti-Pikiells would be an older guy with valid HC experience at the BIG level--if he came from a non-Power 5 conf, they would say he had no track record and couldn't possibly recruit. You mean someone like Tubby Smith? Why would a reasonably successful coach at a Power 5 school--or one just below that level--come to RU, with its recent history, the lack of facilities and the trough in fan and school support? Think we got lucky in hiring Pikiell, who may see this as his chance to snare a name program next--we have to do what it takes to keep him if he does well, and that starts with us fans saying, OK, RU made their choice, even if it wasn't my choice. He now has my complete support. Back during Gary Waters' best years, the RAC rocked, and was a snake pit for visiting teams, and hundreds of raucous RU fans stormed NY for the finals of the NIT. No reason it cannot be that way again, or are today's RU students just too sophisticated, too jaded, too overstimulated and over scheduled to give a rat's *** any more?
TL
TL
Hopefully better than longer than that.
I'm hoping Pikiell will make RU MBB into a constant winner and Dancer.
That's something Waters couldn't even do ,every year he was the HC.
Well, from a strictly basketball point of view, we don't. And where exactly do you think bottom-of-the-barrel programs get their coaches from?
Satisfied that we got a good coach but "wait and see" as far as getting excited. Bottom line is it will come down to recruiting. If he can land some players our competing schools are also after, that would be a sign that things are moving in the right direction.
This was Hobbs chance to hit a HR, or a least a Ground Rule Double....this hire was more like a sacrifice bunt. Not impressed or excited. RU hires a guy who is successful at Stony Brook, and expects him to be able to carry a team through the B1G gauntlet? I am also sure you didn't have to pay him $1.6M/yr either. This hire seems rushed, why not wait a little longer and expand the search, like some folks have been saying? I am sure Pikiell is a great guy, but I have my doubts. I just don't get it.
Maybe this program needs sacrifice bunts. I totally get where you are coming from. I half agree with you and had your initial reaction. Things I think I like (realizing some could just be talk).
1. It seems like he is all in and alligned with Hobbs understanding his role and the importance of fundrasing and just the general need to increase awareness of program
2. He was an assistant under Calhoun (although a LONG time ago)
3. He is relying on others, Calhoun, for advice. Unlike a certain guy he isn't above listening to others and without an ego.
4. I keep hearing the word DEFENSE.
I posted this poll when coach was hired, bumping for people to see their reactions and see if they would change their comments any now.
Negative comments aside, I found it interesting how many posters pegged what is happening now with Pikiell and the program.
Good question, was wondering that myself. He had some good insight, but hasn't posted in a long time.
there should be a statute of limitations on this sort of stuff:flushed:
AshCatch - To be fair, you should have highlighted the last sentence in that post.
Last edited: