UT's next basketball coach - discussion/debate

[HookEm 2463]

If Ohio State and Syracuse jobs both came open, is the consensus that a top coach would take the Ohio State job? I can live with that.

[ztejas 43414]

Cuse has nice history but I don't think it's particularly easy to recruit at and Boehim has been running that show for a looooong time. They've produced very few notable NBA players despite all of their tournament success. I think it's a top 15 job but probably not much better than that. It's closer to a Baylor or Arkansas than a Duke or UCLA imo. 

[HookEm 2463]

I also think the Big12 is still going to be one of the premier college basketball conference even with UT and OU gone.  Houston and Cinci make it a wash. BYU can be good as well.

[Catdaddyhorn 3444]

The only thing that will hurt the league a bit with UT and OU leaving is no longer having a round robin schedule where everyone plays each other twice. I guess next year ( our last year in league) we'll go back to playing KU or a few of the teams only once. 

[Blotto 23491]

15 minutes ago, HookEm said:

I also think the Big12 is still going to be one of the premier college basketball conference even with UT and OU gone.  Houston and Cinci make it a wash. BYU can be good as well.

After the 83-84 Houston squad finished runner up, they next won a tourney game in 2018 under Sampson. In the 33 seasons between, Houston made the tourney a grand total of 4 times. Their program is not nearly the equivalent of OU or Texas. Sampson is damn near 70, and once he's gone they will need to do much better at finding a replacement than they have typically done. The big12 will still be a stout hoops conference, but once Sampson is gone, I bet Houston reverts back to average. 

[redswingline 1057]

On 12/28/2022 at 2:17 AM, shadow_operative said:

you believe that program is a top program because of its elite 8, final four and title appearances, as well as titles won

Your take is somewhere between stupid and moron on the idiot spectrum. I had to fix (bold) your post because it made no sense and does not reflect my opinion.

The fact that you cannot fathom why a programs elite 8, final 4 and title appearances (and wins) is the measuring stick for top programs, tells us all that you are working with an extra chromosome. 

Now that I know you have 23 chromosomes, I want to tell you that i think you are an inspiration and a hero.

 

Edited December 30, 2022 by redswingline

[shadow_operative 15932]

20 minutes ago, redswingline said:

Your take is somewhere between stupid and moron on the idiot spectrum.

 

[redswingline 1057]

8 minutes ago, shadow_operative said:

you believe that program is a top program because of its elite 8, final four and title appearances, as well as titles won

You know what is funny, we aren't even arguing the same points. I think someone else stated as much a couple days back.

if I'm correct, I think your position is how NCAAM jobs are perceived and you are ranking those.

My position is that the clout of a program is based on tourney runs, with more recent (20 years) results having far more weight than decades prior.

[Macklemore 2876]

Edit

Edited December 30, 2022 by Macklemore

[Brian Fantana 6683]

2 hours ago, Blotto said:

After the 83-84 Houston squad finished runner up, they next won a tourney game in 2018 under Sampson. In the 33 seasons between, Houston made the tourney a grand total of 4 times. Their program is not nearly the equivalent of OU or Texas. Sampson is damn near 70, and once he's gone they will need to do much better at finding a replacement than they have typically done. The big12 will still be a stout hoops conference, but once Sampson is gone, I bet Houston reverts back to average. 

I'm sorry but nobody but old fans sitting in their seats with crossed arms give two shits about any part of that bolded section. Recruits see that they have been to the SS, the EE and a FF in the last 4 years. They see them ranked 3rd and getting a lot of positive press. That's what matters. Full stop, sprinkle some NIL in there.

Like, think about what you're saying here. "Oh yeah? Well just wait until Kelvin Sampson DIES and we'll see how good they are then." Do you think that is entering the mind of ANY recruit? The guys with legitimate NBA aspirations are going to be at that school for like 2 years, they don't give a fuck about Sampson's longevity past their own narrow window of playtime. 67 ain't that old, he's probably got at least another 6-8 years in him.

A more valid criticism to draw would be the overall inability to fill your arena with any kind of consistency in a city of 2.5 million, but that's another conversation.

[jimmyjazz 45893]

1 hour ago, redswingline said:

You know what is funny, we aren't even arguing the same points. I think someone else stated as much a couple days back.

if I'm correct, I think your position is how NCAAM jobs are perceived and you are ranking those.

My position is that the clout of a program is based on tourney runs, with more recent (20 years) results having far more weight than decades prior.

It's both.  The momentum of historical success is hard to dispute.  The lure of money and talent is hard to dispute.  

I mean, does anyone actually think that, were Bill Self to retire tomorrow, the clamor amongst top coaches to grab that job wouldn't be huge? 

[redswingline 1057]

3 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

It's both.  The momentum of historical success is hard to dispute.  The lure of money and talent is hard to dispute.  

I mean, does anyone actually think that, were Bill Self to retire tomorrow, the clamor amongst top coaches to grab that job wouldn't be huge? 

maybe so, but it's a weird dichotomy.

I don't think we should confuse ability to pay with program prestige because i think that prestige is built over time, via deep tourney runs.

the last time we got to a final four was the same year we invaded iraq

 

 

[shadow_operative 15932]

44 minutes ago, redswingline said:

maybe so, but it's a weird dichotomy.

I don't think we should confuse ability to pay with program prestige because i think that prestige is built over time, via deep tourney runs.

the last time we got to a final four was the same year we invaded iraq

 

 

program prestige and desirability of the head coaching position are not the same thing. how many more people are going to take a simple premise (Texas is an elite, top 5-ish job) and turn it into something else? 

[shadow_operative 15932]

how many extremely desirable jobs are there in CBB? jobs that you essentially never turn down if offered? maybe 6 or 7, yeah? and Texas is on that list, yes? so what else is there to talk about? 

[troph 24781]

Texas is not on the you don’t turn it down list. Only Duke, Carolina, Kentucky and Kansas are on that list. 

[shadow_operative 15932]

1 hour ago, troph said:

Texas is not on the you don’t turn it down list. Only Duke, Carolina, Kentucky and Kansas are on that list. 

i'd wager that plenty of coaches would turn down the kentucky job before they'd turn down the texas job. 

[shadow_operative 15932]

aamof multiple coaches have publicly said no to kentucky, including rick barnes. there aren't any coaches out there looking to climb the ranks who are turning down the Texas job if offered. 

Edited December 30, 2022 by shadow_operative

[ztejas 43414]

3 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

I'm sorry but nobody but old fans sitting in their seats with crossed arms give two shits about any part of that bolded section. Recruits see that they have been to the SS, the EE and a FF in the last 4 years. They see them ranked 3rd and getting a lot of positive press. That's what matters. Full stop, sprinkle some NIL in there.

Like, think about what you're saying here. "Oh yeah? Well just wait until Kelvin Sampson DIES and we'll see how good they are then." Do you think that is entering the mind of ANY recruit? The guys with legitimate NBA aspirations are going to be at that school for like 2 years, they don't give a fuck about Sampson's longevity past their own narrow window of playtime. 67 ain't that old, he's probably got at least another 6-8 years in him.

A more valid criticism to draw would be the overall inability to fill your arena with any kind of consistency in a city of 2.5 million, but that's another conversation.

@Blotto made a great point. It took a very, very good coach to resurrect that program after multiple decades of irrelevance and once Sampson departs there is no guarantee that UH will return to the same glory. It's honestly a very legitimate way of evaluating the appeal of a particular job - especially when you're looking 10-15 years into the future. 

Sort of like if you were to evaluate the Texas Tech job based on the results that Chris Beard achieved. That program has been irrelevant for most of its history and will likely continue to be irrelevant in the future. It would be silly to pretend that one coach's results would give it enough momentum to perpetually be a name-brand in college basketball. 

I mean - that's just one example. I'm sure there's other examples that could illustrate the same idea.

[Brian Fantana 6683]

Ignoring the lame ass attempt to take a shot at me, all I'm saying is basketball is very much an in the moment sport, much moreso than football, so saying "well if you didn't have X Y Z right now, you wouldn't be shit" is a silly conversation to have, because it applies to just about everyone. It takes a lot of sustained effort for a program to remain relevant.

[hobbes2702 13031]

11 hours ago, redswingline said:

You know what is funny, we aren't even arguing the same points. I think someone else stated as much a couple days back.

if I'm correct, I think your position is how NCAAM jobs are perceived and you are ranking those.

My position is that the clout of a program is based on tourney runs, with more recent (20 years) results having far more weight than decades prior.

If you’re correct? It’s been explicitly stated that you’re yelling at clouds. At least you finally figured out the discussion after 3 days.

The clout? What the fuck are you talking about?

[Doc Daneeka 6769]

11 hours ago, redswingline said:

You know what is funny, we aren't even arguing the same points. I think someone else stated as much a couple days back.

if I'm correct, I think your position is how NCAAM jobs are perceived and you are ranking those.

My position is that the clout of a program is based on tourney runs, with more recent (20 years) results having far more weight than decades prior.

How successful a program has been with tournament runs, with recent results weighted more heavily, is a different discussion than which jobs are most attractive. They shouldn’t be conflated, but there are pages of that happening. 

[troph 24781]

Texas basketball is…. 
 

 

I’m out, have fun touching yourselves. 

[ztejas 43414]

1 hour ago, Brian Fantana said:

Ignoring the lame ass attempt to take a shot at me, all I'm saying is basketball is very much an in the moment sport, much moreso than football, so saying "well if you didn't have X Y Z right now, you wouldn't be shit" is a silly conversation to have, because it applies to just about everyone. It takes a lot of sustained effort for a program to remain relevant.

Basically the only thing you addressed in your retort was short-term recruiting. There is a lot more than that that goes into both how attractive a job is and how healthy a program is. Your point is, what - that UH is a great program and job because they will still recruit well for a couple seasons after Sampson hangs it up? UH's recent success is like 80% if not more attributable to who their HC is right now. 

It isn't particularly difficult to win there but at the end of the day it's a commuter school with a terrible fan base and little donor support that had an all-time head coach for 30 seasons and then managed to make a good hire after six bad ones over the course of almost 30 years. They're another bad hire or two away from being an afterthought again in a way that Texas or OU will never be. Even Shaka's dumb ass was getting guys drafted in the first round and getting Texas to the tourney more often than not. A bad hire at Houston does neither of those things. 

[Pancho 44720]

Texas is definitely on the “don’t turn that down” or “oh shit, that job is open? I need to think about that” list. Kentucky wants you winning a NC in year 1. I don’t think coaches want that pressure. 

 

Also, for people wanting Terry long term—I’d imagine he’d be a Sark type at UT. You happy with Sark? 

[Brian Fantana 6683]

1 hour ago, ztejas said:

Basically the only thing you addressed in your retort was short-term recruiting. There is a lot more than that that goes into both how attractive a job is and how healthy a program is. Your point is, what - that UH is a great program and job because they will still recruit well for a couple seasons after Sampson hangs it up? UH's recent success is like 80% if not more attributable to who their HC is right now. 

It isn't particularly difficult to win there but at the end of the day it's a commuter school with a terrible fan base and little donor support that had an all-time head coach for 30 seasons and then managed to make a good hire after six bad ones over the course of almost 30 years. They're another bad hire or two away from being an afterthought again in a way that Texas or OU will never be. Even Shaka's dumb ass was getting guys drafted in the first round and getting Texas to the tourney more often than not. A bad hire at Houston does neither of those things. 

Yeah I guess I don't disagree and am kind of talking in circles. They do need to take further steps beyond retaining Sampson for X years to continue that success, for sure. Like you said, they don't really have good fan support despite recent success, which is kind of an anomaly among "top" programs.

I'd argue that OU is already kind of an afterthought program, though, at least in basketball. Texas will never be unless you guys somehow have a continuous string of bad seasons that lasts until KD is an old man.

[ClubWhatever 12120]

Terry seems like a decent coach and good recruiter.  Can go back to a program at the G5 level as HC and do pretty well.  Won’t be the coach at Texas unless our young players rapidly mature and we make a surprising run to the final weekend.  Don’t see that happening with the defensive falloff lately.   As somebody noted on another thread the opp FG% has been trending up.  The shooting is too inconsistent for that to be sustainable.  

[ztejas 43414]

13 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

I'd argue that OU is already kind of an afterthought program, though, at least in basketball.

OU is a solid program that I think made a bad hire in Moser. I'd expect them to rebound at some point.

[closetohumping 17437]

20 hours ago, HookEm said:

In the era of NIL, I think the big, rich schools like UT, Michigan, Florida, Ohio State move way up the list of desirability.  Right now if you are a great coach, and you can coach at Michigan or Indiana, I think you take the Michigan job.  

I think this would be my ranking of job attractiveness if the job "suddenly" came open.

1. UNC - Jordan, Nike, history, fan support, money, class
2. Kansas - Passionate, knowledgeable fanbase
3. Kentucky - Biggest, most rabid fanbase who will do anything to win, but unrealistic
4. UCLA - Dominate the west coast and live like a king in LA
5. Duke - Money, history, huge NBA alumni base, fans  (but who knows if this will hold)
6. Texas - Money, new arena, low expectations, 'cruits
7. Michigan
8. Indiana
9. Louisville
10. Arizona
11. Florida
12. Syracuse
13. Michigan State
14. Ohio State
15. Baylor
16. Cincinnati
17. UCONN
18. Villanova
19. Illinois
20. Gonzaga
21. Arkansas
22. Oklahoma
23. Tennessee
24. Oregon
25. Maryland
26. NC State
27. Mizzou
28. Oklahoma State
29. Texas Tech
30. Memphis
31. LSU
32. Iowa State

 

Thanks.  Why Syracuse above 13-14?  And fuck Baylor.

[Satchel 6935]

2 hours ago, closetohumping said:

Thanks.  Why Syracuse above 13-14?  And fuck Baylor.

If “Money, new arena, low expectations, 'cruits” are reasons for UT’s ranking, why is OU ranks ahead of Tech?

[HookEm 2463]

Syracuse still can be the premiere basketball school for NYC area recruits. Put someone like Calipari there and they could dominate. Their last title isn’t that long ago.

Regarding Tech vs OU, I guess a case could be made for Tech. They have shown a willingness to win and have hired some decent coaches in the last 20 years. And I think they could do better in the Big 12 than OU will in the SEC. Call it a wash I guess.

[Satchel 6935]

14 minutes ago, HookEm said:

Syracuse still can be the premiere basketball school for NYC area recruits. Put someone like Calipari there and they could dominate. Their last title isn’t that long ago.

Regarding Tech vs OU, I guess a case could be made for Tech. They have shown a willingness to win and have hired some decent coaches in the last 20 years. And I think they could do better in the Big 12 than OU will in the SEC. Call it a wash I guess.

OU plays in the worst arena in the Big 12, has underwhelming attendance numbers and doesn’t recruit all that well.  That’s something other than a wash.

[tx 3 putt 76880]

11 hours ago, closetohumping said:

Thanks.  Why Syracuse above 13-14?  And fuck Baylor.

 

syracuse sports media mob is strong

[ztejas 43414]

8 hours ago, HookEm said:

Syracuse still can be the premiere basketball school for NYC area recruits.

Not really. Nova and UCONN are both closer to NYC. 

I mean I guess it "could" be but it isn't and never really has been. 

It's a good job but I wouldn't want to be the guy that follows Boehim. 

[Brian Fantana 6683]

20 minutes ago, ztejas said:

Not really. Nova and UCONN are both closer to NYC. 

I mean I guess it "could" be but it isn't and never really has been. 

It's a good job but I wouldn't want to be the guy that follows Boehim. 

Yeah I think he has stayed too long at this point, and the longer he drags his feet on retirement, the harder it's going to be on the next guy up.

[redswingline 1057]

 

On 12/30/2022 at 8:10 AM, hobbes2702 said:

 

The clout? What the fuck are you talking about?

You cannot completely separate what a top program is from the desirability of the job. They are intertwined.  While I have focused on tourney runs as the measuring stick for a program, it still relates to the job. There's a slight nuance there.

if you are not sure what clout means, go look it up.

 

Edited December 31, 2022 by redswingline

[jimmyjazz 45893]

I have to admit I'm surprised Sampson has done this well at Cougar High.  I never really thought all that much of him at OU.  Not that he didn't have some success, he did, but he always struck me as less than compelling when compared to the top coaches in the game at the time (K, Williams, Izzo, Pitino, etc.).

[shadow_operative 15932]

well he really knows his basketball, and he's got an identity, which really helps in recruiting in gbat you can go search for the right guys to fit your system/identity, which means getting a high ROI on lower rated players if you can identify the right ones. defending, rebounding, and physicality are his trademarks, and he can really coach em up. i agree with you, he's done better than i thought he would, and proven himself a top tier college coach with the job he's doing at U of H.

[Wulaw Horn 19068]

17 minutes ago, shadow_operative said:

well he really knows his basketball, and he's got an identity, which really helps in recruiting in gbat you can go search for the right guys to fit your system/identity, which means getting a high ROI on lower rated players if you can identify the right ones. defending, rebounding, and physicality are his trademarks, and he can really coach em up. i agree with you, he's done better than i thought he would, and proven himself a top tier college coach with the job he's doing at U of H.

Sampson is basically 5% better coach than Rick Barnes but they are the same guy for good or ill- he’s just slightly more accomplished at it. 

[Loop 1604 227]

Go get Musselman or Oats.

[Brian Fantana 6683]

On 12/31/2022 at 4:48 PM, shadow_operative said:

well he really knows his basketball, and he's got an identity, which really helps in recruiting in gbat you can go search for the right guys to fit your system/identity, which means getting a high ROI on lower rated players if you can identify the right ones. defending, rebounding, and physicality are his trademarks, and he can really coach em up. i agree with you, he's done better than i thought he would, and proven himself a top tier college coach with the job he's doing at U of H.

The only real negative against him is he's getting older imo

Plenty of programs would hire him if they could I think

[Hook1997 5351]

Nightmare scenario is Rodney Terry wins a couple tournament games with Beards players and they give him a contract… 

[Droopy 2626]

So...who's it going to be, now that the Beard era is over at Texas? Please, please, be someone that is good and doesn't have weak ass shit moments like Beard. What an absolute waste. 🤬🤘

[closetohumping 17437]

Royal Ivey?

[Rickylovesweed 14262]

1 minute ago, Hook1997 said:

Nightmare scenario is Rodney Terry wins a couple tournament games with Beards players and they give him a contract… 

No chance that's happening. 

Just pay him to remain the associate head coach. 

[cafe society 2860]

I hope we have already identified our guy and have basically tampered the shit out of him and have a sub rosa deal.

[cafe society 2860]

1 minute ago, closetohumping said:

Royal Ivey?

Perhaps not my number one choice but if he can be on the sideline Saturday morning make it happen.

[Pancho 44720]

8 minutes ago, Droopy said:

So...who's it going to be, now that the Beard era is over at Texas? Please, please, be someone that is good and doesn't have weak ass shit moments like Beard. What an absolute waste. 🤬🤘

It's January. 

It's way too early to tell. 

But this news has probably gotten a few people talking. We will have to wait until April for a hire though. 

[Rockethorn1978 6072]

I’d love to know a realistic top 5. I guess Royal Ivey? But that sounds more like people guessing.

how about Jerome tang from kstate who just kicked our ass, has Texas ties and would be perfect for the sec and has a history of dirty recruiter that we will need.

[HornyPony69 212]

Let’s hire Mark Adams just to fuck with tech. 

[BonzoMontreaux 1038]

Lots of raises for coaches across the country coming up.