Fire Shaka Smart

[2inDaPink1inDaStink 106]

8 minutes ago, Goo Punch said:

oh jesus. you lost me. 

I think we start next season without a single starter from this team. The fab five 2.0 ain’t walking through the door next year. 

[Goo Punch 4275]

yeah but neither is dave bliss.

[2inDaPink1inDaStink 106]

I have watched a few longhorn BB teams over the year, every year there is at least one likeable guy. This team has one guy I like to watch but that’s not the same as likeable The likeable guy wasn’t always the best player, he wasn’t necessarily a winner, or gym rat or whatever cliche you want to use, but there was always at least one, this team has got nada.

[2inDaPink1inDaStink 106]

I would take a Dogus Balbay over any of these guys, 

[Goo Punch 4275]

Aside from DO there isn't a guy on the roster who so much as aggravats me. It isn't their fault. Eric Musselman would have this team scoring 80 points with regularity. As far as college athletics go, my motto is "try not to hate the player as much as you hate the coach for giving such a shitty player such a big role." DO sucks, and I don't think he even loves basketball, but he wasn't the one who decided he should shoot five threes every game. know what i mean, Vern?

Edited January 14, 2019 by Goo Punch

[VirginiaLonghorn 4911]

7 hours ago, Goo Punch said:

Aside from DO there isn't a guy on the roster who so much as aggravats me. It isn't their fault. Eric Musselman would have this team scoring 80 points with regularity. As far as college athletics go, my motto is "try not to hate the player as much as you hate the coach for giving such a shitty player such a big role." DO sucks, and I don't think he even loves basketball, but he wasn't the one who decided he should shoot five threes every game. know what i mean, Vern?

.. and almost as likely to miss that many 2-footers per game, too. 

[Horn80 6359]

Never thought I would say this but I miss Barnes doghouse.

[Burt Macklin 19230]

9 hours ago, 2inDaPink1inDaStink said:

If we keep smart another year, we set this program up on a path that will take 10 years to fix. I said the same thing about the football program when Mack stopped trying in 2010. 

I actually completely disagree with this part. Shaka’s last two recruiting classes have actually been really good and while I want him gone, he’s not tearing down the program from a skill standpoint like smack was. He took 7 guys who looked to be guys who spend at last two years on campus (Hayes is the unexpected exception) and can easily form a very solid core for this team moving forward. A new coach in 2020-2021 could have a roster of:

Seniors: Coleman, Sims (maybe a new coach could at least get him back to being a plus contributor like he was his FR year)

Juniors: Hepa, Ramey, Lidell

Soph: Baker, Jones, Williams, Cunningham (RS).

a good coach could win with that roster plus whoever we get in the 2020 class and it’s pretty balanced moving forward. 

Don’t get me wrong, I want Shaka gone,  but he’s bringing in enough talent for an actually good coach to come in and win right away.

[Skipper 6411]

I think just about everyone realizes it's just a matter of when, not if, with Shaka at this point.   My guess is CDC is hoping Shaka can tread water this year and win enough games to make the tourney and knock 3 million off the buy out to make it an easy decision when we inevitably underachieve next season.   I know the counter to that is the cost/benefit analysis that avoiding another year of apathy in the fanbase is worth > $3MM.  Does anyone have figures that shows net income for baskeball over the past decade?  I couldn't find with a quick google search.  And not sure there is public data that would show donations tied to basketball, etc.  My guess is that basketball income is relatively static and apathy doesn't move the needle like it would in football, but that's just a guess.  Clearly CDC is going to be weighing this over the coming weeks if Shaka doesn't have a miracle turnaround.

And l agree with the above poster that the team played decent overall against Tech so don't have as much of a problem with that game.  But if they would have had the same effort against a shitty OSU team they win that game double digits easily.   That stinker (along with several others this year) was a much bigger indictment of the Shaka era and is par for the course.

[Machinator 32103]

18 minutes ago, Skipper said:

I think just about everyone realizes it's just a matter of when, not if, with Shaka at this point.   My guess is CDC is hoping Shaka can tread water this year and win enough games to make the tourney and knock 3 million off the buy out to make it an easy decision when we inevitably underachieve next season.   I know the counter to that is the cost/benefit analysis that avoiding another year of apathy in the fanbase is worth > $3MM.  Does anyone have figures that shows net income for baskeball over the past decade?  I couldn't find with a quick google search.  And not sure there is public data that would show donations tied to basketball, etc.  My guess is that basketball income is relatively static and apathy doesn't move the needle like it would in football, but that's just a guess.  Clearly CDC is going to be weighing this over the coming weeks if Shaka doesn't have a miracle turnaround.

 

I was reading on another board from a poster who's plugged into these sorts of things that we gross about $18M with $10M in expenses (annually), and in the midst of a period where we're already having to raise funds for numerous other capital projects (most notably the SEZ), we don't have as much money laying around as you'd think. Obviously I have no way of verifying these numbers.

I think you nailed it in saying that basketball interest and income is fairly stable unless we completely crater (like 2016-17) or make a deep run in the tournament.

Edited January 14, 2019 by Machinator

[Skipper 6411]

2 minutes ago, Machinator said:

I was reading on another board from a poster who's plugged into these sorts of things that we gross about $18M with $10M in expenses (annually), and in the midst of a period where we're already having to raise funds for numerous other capital projects (most notably the SEZ). Obviously I have no way of verifying these numbers.

I think you nailed it in saying that basketball interest and income is fairly stable unless we completely crater (like 2016-17) or make a deep run in the tournament.

That's what would make it interesting to see the net income over the last decade.   Did we get a big bump in 08 with a tourney run?  Did we slowly see a drop towards the end of the Barnes tenure that jumped back up when Shaka was hired?  It would be really interesting to see the numbers and what impact winning (or perceived state of the program) has compared to shitty seasons.  I'm guessing it isn't anywhere near as dramatic as football.

[Bitterwhiteguy 153]

If I understand correctly, the remaining guaranteed money for Shaka is around $14.5m now (we're halfway through the season) and $13m after the season ends. Perrin extended Shaka by a year, so 3-ish mil of that is on him, not Patterson. As for why he got so much guaranteed money, that's becoming par for the course in luring coaches out of spots they enjoy. Chris Mack got something conceptually similar to leave Xavier for Louisville, and whoever you want to replace Shaka will demand the same. If you want Beard, assuming he says yes (which isn't a given) his buyout will be in the neighborhood of $6 mil, so the price of replacing Shaka is more like $20 mil before you pay Beard a dime of salary.

All of this says to me that you're in for one more year of Shaka at the very least.

[Katfid54 9005]

24 minutes ago, Bitterwhiteguy said:

All of this says to me that you're in for one more year of Shaka at the very least.

[Goo Punch 4275]

There is literally no reason that money should stand in the way of the richest athletic department in the world firing the worst basketball coach they've had in 30 years. None. "Sorry guys, even though we *know* that this guy is in way over his head and is nowhere near up to par, we're going to keep him (and his inept teams, his empty arena, and his embarrassing conference record) for another year because we don't have enough money to justify firing him." Bullshit. We don't get to talk all this shit about how "We're Texas" and "We're the Joneses", only to turn around and do that. All this buyout money means is that we better fucking get the next hire right. That's it.

If our next coach does for us what Beard has done at TTU, what Barnes has done at Tennessee, what Dixon has done at TCU,  what Buzz has done at Va Tech, Bennett has done at UVA, and so on and so forth for a dozen more examples, then we will begin to recoup those losses immediately. Keeping this lame duck coach is only going to hurt our program. sometimes you just have to take a loss. This is one of those times. 

Edited January 14, 2019 by Goo Punch

[Burt Macklin 19230]

28 minutes ago, Bitterwhiteguy said:

If I understand correctly, the remaining guaranteed money for Shaka is around $14.5m now (we're halfway through the season) and $13m after the season ends. Perrin extended Shaka by a year, so 3-ish mil of that is on him, not Patterson. As for why he got so much guaranteed money, that's becoming par for the course in luring coaches out of spots they enjoy. Chris Mack got something conceptually similar to leave Xavier for Louisville, and whoever you want to replace Shaka will demand the same. If you want Beard, assuming he says yes (which isn't a given) his buyout will be in the neighborhood of $6 mil, so the price of replacing Shaka is more like $20 mil before you pay Beard a dime of salary.

All of this says to me that you're in for one more year of Shaka at the very least.

I’m going to ignore the fact that Hoiberg May get hired by the T-Wolves or another org and has also said he doesn’t want to coach college again because he hates recruiting, and point out that Hoiberg has no buyout, so firing Shaka for $13 million this year and hiring Hoiberg would cost the same as firing Shaka two years from now and paying Beard (or a coach with a similar buyout) two years from now.

A man can dream, can’t he?

[Goo Punch 4275]

2 minutes ago, Burt Macklin said:

I’m going to ignore the fact that Hoiberg May get hired by the T-Wolves or another org and has also said he doesn’t want to coach college again because he hates recruiting, and point out that Hoiberg has no buyout, so firing Shaka for $13 million this year and hiring Hoiberg would cost the same as firing Shaka two years from now and paying Beard (or a coach with a similar buyout) two years from now.

A man can dream, can’t he?

Two or three days ago Hoiberg said he does want to coach college again and that his next job could be a college gig.

[Burt Macklin 19230]

Just now, Goo Punch said:

Two or three days ago Hoiberg said he does want to coach college again and that his next job could be a college gig.

IF Hoiberg’s actually available, I think you have to factor in him not having a buyout. Firing Shaka this year and getting Hoiberg (again, if possible), would be cheaper than firing Shaka next year and hiring any coach who’s currently under contract. You’re almost never going to get someone of Hoiberg’s Ilk who doesn’t have a pretty huge buyout attached to them.

[Goo Punch 4275]

seriously, i'm fed up with this fucking "it's gonna cost too much money" talk. there is zero chance that we keep Shaka around another year because of money. None. CDC has proven himself to be an absolute G. He will find a way to do what's right. I absolutely refuse to believe that money is an issue when we're talking about a coach this inept and an athletics department this rich, not to mention all of the success we are having in other sports.

Edited January 14, 2019 by Goo Punch

[Goo Punch 4275]

Just now, Burt Macklin said:

IF Hoiberg’s actually available, I think you have to factor in him not having a buyout. Firing Shaka this year and getting Hoiberg (again, if possible), would be cheaper than firing Shaka next year and hiring any coach who’s currently under contract. You’re almost never going to get someone of Hoiberg’s Ilk who doesn’t have a pretty huge buyout attached to them.

Hoiberg is the dream. 

[Machinator 32103]

Just now, Goo Punch said:

seriously, i'm fed up with this fucking money y'all. there is zero chance that we keep Shaka around another year because of money. None. CDC has proven himself to be an absolute G. He will find a way to do what's right. I absolutely refuse to believe that money is an issue when we're talking about a coach this inept. 

CDC is a wicked fundraiser, but if he pulled this off he might actually be a god.

[Skipper 6411]

3 minutes ago, Goo Punch said:

There is literally no reason that money should stand in the way of the richest athletic department in the world firing the worst basketball coach they've had in 30 years. None.

Spoken like an emotional fan that has zero appreciation for the massive capital commitments the athletic department is currently undertaking.   I'm not saying it won't happen but that's a very simplistic way to view this.  It's pretty shitty timing.  Hence why I wondered if anyone has the actual data because I'm speculating from a pure balance sheet perspective it may make sense to wait another year.  Best bet is there is a donor that is a huge basketball fan that hasn't already been tapped out for Strong Buyout/SEZ project, etc.    

[Js1 87182]

1 minute ago, Goo Punch said:

Hoiberg is the dream. 

Hoiberg at Texas is a wet dream.  Please.

[Goo Punch 4275]

2 minutes ago, Skipper said:

Spoken like an emotional fan that has zero appreciation for the massive capital commitments the athletic department is currently undertaking.   I'm not saying it won't happen but that's a very simplistic way to view this.  It's pretty shitty timing.  Hence why I wondered if anyone has the actual data because I'm speculating from a pure balance sheet perspective it may make sense to wait another year.  Best bet is there is a donor that is a huge basketball fan that hasn't already been tapped out for Strong Buyout/SEZ project, etc.    

no, it's spoken like someone who believes in CDC. His first question: do we need a new basketball coach? the answer is a resounding YES. So the next question is: "How do we make it happen?" I have no doubt that he will have to delve deep into his bag of tricks to make it happen, just as I have no doubt that CDC understands that wasting an entire year on a terrible coach is not an option at this point. 

Edited January 14, 2019 by Goo Punch

[Machinator 32103]

As much as I don't care for discussing future coaching candidates when we don't even know when the current one is leaving, here's an alternative take from someone on another board about candidates beyond Chris Beard.

[Prohm has] done a great job recruiting (Hoiberg would be a “sexy” name, if you want to go that far...but he was never a great recruiter and he objectively hated the time he spent doing it...that’s a poor fit for what Texas needs). But Prohm is both picking top-100 players out of Chicago and Oak Hill, and he’s unearthing relatively hidden gems like Haliburton.

He’s also really good both offensively and defensively. We want to take the next step as a program and be a legitimate contender? Okay...the way to really contend is to have both a top-25 offense and defense. Relaxing those standards a bit, let’s look at the guys who are in the top-40 in both on KenPom right now:

Buzz Williams
Steve Prohm
Bruce Pearl

Those are maybe the only guys clearly on this list who might be attaianable. And if you don’t LOL at Pearl, I don’t know what to tell you. He’s almost too tarnished even for Auburn. But not quite, obviously...

Then you get Eric Mussellman (had a terrible defense historically before this year, and do you really see him being a long term guy?). And you get to Woj, who had an even worse defense before this year.

And you get to a bunch of guys who probably aren’t leaving the Midwest anytime soon: Archie Miller, Greg Gard, Chris Holtmann, and Mick Cronin. Even those last two are just outside of one of the top-40 rankings this year, though they’re really close.

And when you start relaxing the top-40 thing, you also get to Johnny Dawkins, who already failed at a Power 6 job at Stanford.

And you get to an old dog like Leonard Hamilton who is (maybe?) learning a couple of new tricks in his twilight years. But man is he old. And most of his career doesn’t look any better (it was mostly worse) than Shaka’s last 4 years here. 

And last, but certainly not least, you get to Nate Oats, who has the #16 offense and #44 defense at Buffalo! And he’s young(ish) and doesn’t have a real tie to the northeast. He’s actually from the Midwest, but has already left there for Buffalo. I’d like to know some more color on him, but he has to make your top-10 list at least, if not top-3 or 5.

As an aside, if you’re asking where asking where Beard is on this list, his offense would have to rise significantly from their current ranking in the 90s to put him there. He had the #50 offense last year with Keenan Evans, Jarrett Culver, and Zhaire Smith.

But back to Prohm...he currently has both a top-30 offense and defense (he has twice had better defenses than Hoiberg ever did, and his offense certainly isn’t in question). He is a young(ish) guy. He recruits well. He seems like a really positive leader. He’s from the south. And I’m not sure his current fan base appreciates him like they should. He’s also only getting paid $2 million annually.

If anyone’s list had Steve Prohm, Buzz Williams, and/or Nate Oats alongside Beard’s name, I’d take their opinion a lot more seriously.

[Goo Punch 4275]

Prohm was awesome at Murray State and is another good candidate. I would be pretty excited to have him as our coach next year.

[Sbbruin 22143]

8 minutes ago, Goo Punch said:

seriously, i'm fed up with this fucking "it's gonna cost too much money" talk. there is zero chance that we keep Shaka around another year because of money. None. CDC has proven himself to be an absolute G. He will find a way to do what's right. I absolutely refuse to believe that money is an issue when we're talking about a coach this inept and an athletics department this rich, not to mention all of the success we are having in other sports.

We wrote Jim Mora a $12 mil check to go away, and Alford $2.5 mil 12 months later.  If we can do that, certainly Texas can.

[Skipper 6411]

2 minutes ago, Goo Punch said:

no, it's spoken like someone who believes in CDC. His first question: do we need a new basketball coach? the answer is a resounding YES. So the next question is: "How do we make it happen?" I have no doubt that he will have to delve deep into his bag of tricks to make it happen, just as I have no doubt that CDC understands that wasting an entire year on a terrible coach is not an option at this point. 

My guess is CDC is very much hoping Shaka can win enough games to make the tourney and kick the can down the road and continue to focus on raising money for the projects that are already ongoing.   You are probably the biggest basketball fan there is so we get that retaining an underachieving coach is inconceivable to you.   The posters on this board probably represent the top 5% of Texas basketball fans.  And how many on here are willing to donate for Shaka's buyout?  Not me.  The reality is many in the fanbase don't care that much about basketball and certainly not enough to write a check.  Again, it's why I speculate there aren't wild revenue swings like you see in football.  I'm not saying CDC won't figure out a way to make it happen, particularly if the team completely falls apart, but I don't think it's as cut and dry as you are hoping it is.

[destroya 403]

6 minutes ago, Skipper said:

... The reality is many in the fanbase don't care that much about basketball...

Not disagreeing with you, but the guaranteed way to ensure that our fans continue not caring about basketball is to keep Shaka smart.  Winning is the only thing that will make fans give a damn, and it doesn't look like Shaka is the guy to make that happen.

 

[Goo Punch 4275]

what if we decided to "keep shaka one more year" because of money, and then hayes returned to school, baker turns out to be legit, the team is improved, we finish 10-8 in the league and we make the tournament as an 8 or 9 seed. Then what? If we fire him after that the entire fan base would be like, "why the fuck didn't we fire him last year if we were going to fire him for this?!" and of course the alternative would be that we decide not to fire him at all after that!

the only other two alternatives are that we do even better than this 10-8/8 seed scenario (extremely unlikely), or we do even worse than that, which again would involve a completely restless fan base wondering wtf took so long to shit can this terrible coach. Meanwhile every single coach who goes after the same recruits that we do is telling those kids, "none of those coaches will even be at Texas when you get there, you can't commit to them." 

like I said, sometimes things get so bad that you are forced to take a loss, and this is one of those times. if we have to lose some money in the short term to bring the program back to prominence then so be it. 

[Machinator 32103]

5 minutes ago, Goo Punch said:

what if we decided to "keep shaka one more year" because of money, and then hayes returned to school, baker turns out to be legit, the team is improved, we finish 10-8 in the league and we make the tournament as an 8 or 9 seed. Then what? If we fire him after that the entire fan base would be like, "why the fuck didn't we fire him last year if we were going to fire him for this?!" and of course the alternative would be that we decide not to fire him at all after that!

the only other two alternatives are that we do even better than this 10-8/8 seed scenario (extremely unlikely), or we do even worse than that, which again would involve a completely restless fan base wondering wtf took so long to shit can this terrible coach. Meanwhile every single coach who goes after the same recruits that we do is telling those kids, "none of those coaches will even be at Texas when you get there, you can't commit to them." 

like I said, sometimes things get so bad that you are forced to take a loss, and this is one of those times. if we have to lose some money in the short term to bring the program back to prominence then so be it. 

This is our concern, dude.

You're preaching to the choir. Find some big money donors and make them see straight.

Edit: I think Hayes is gone, though.

Edited January 14, 2019 by Machinator

[ztejas 44227]

1 minute ago, Goo Punch said:

what if we decided to "keep shaka one more year" because of money, and then hayes returned to school, baker turns out to be legit, the team is improved, we finish 10-8 in the league and we make the tournament as an 8 or 9 seed. Then what? If we fire him after that the entire fan base would be like, "why the fuck didn't we fire him last year if we were going to fire him for this?!" and of course the alternative would be that we decide not to fire him at all after that!

the only other two alternatives are that we do even better than this 10-8/8 seed scenario (extremely unlikely), or we do even worse than that, which again would involve a completely restless fan base wondering wtf took so long to shit can this terrible coach. Meanwhile every single coach who goes after the same recruits that we do is telling those kids, "none of those coaches will even be at Texas when you get there, you can't commit to them." 

like I said, sometimes things get so bad that you are forced to take a loss, and this is one of those times. if we have to lose some money in the short term to bring the program back to prominence then so be it. 

You could have made this exact comment verbatim a year ago. 

That's was sad about this situation. Because of the ridiculous fucking contract he's coaching this season when he should have been canned in March. It doesn't take 3 years to win a tournament game at Texas. Especially when you piss away one of those seasons and hang 20 losses on the board. 

Barnes in his first season won the regular season B12. In his second season Texas won a tournament game. In his 4th season Texas made the sweet sixteen. Year 5 was the Final Four run. In that 5-year stretch UT's worst finish in conference was T-3rd. Shaka has gone 4th, last, T-6th in conference and his two tournament teams were both on the bubble at the end of the season. 

[Fozzz 152]

How would people itt rate the Texas basketball program among other college basketball programs?  Is it a top 10 job?  A top 25 job?  If the latter, should Shaka be fired if he can produce a top 25-30 team this season and next?  

[Goo Punch 4275]

6 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

How would people itt rate the Texas basketball program among other college basketball programs?  Is it a top 10 job?  A top 25 job?  If the latter, should Shaka be fired if he can produce a top 25-30 team this season and next?  

it's one of the best jobs in the country because of a number of factors.

1)You get to live in Austin, Texas

2)We will pay you a top 10 salary

3)You have the ability to win an NCAA title here

4)You have none of the expectation that find at a blue blood school- if you make the tourney consistently you're gold

5)Texas is the most fertile recruiting ground in the country. Every year you can stay home and recruit top flight players.

6)Nobody has struggled to recruit here since Barnes arrived. The school, city, facilities, and tradition (yes, tradition) sell themselves

7)As noted, we have more money than any other athletic department

8)We're about to open a shiny new arena

 

IMO that's a top 10-15 job nationally, closer to top 10. There isn't a school you can name that's a better job that has anywhere close to the job security you'd have in Texas, not to mention the fact that Austin > Durham, Chapel Hill, Lawrence, Lexington, etc. Any gig that's a "better" gig will come with much higher demand and a shittier city. Texas is a dream job for any coach who can win here. 

[ztejas 44227]

14 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

How would people itt rate the Texas basketball program among other college basketball programs?  Is it a top 10 job?  A top 25 job?  If the latter, should Shaka be fired if he can produce a top 25-30 team this season and next?  

I think top 25 is fair. I don't think there are more than 25 teams in the country easier to win at. There certainly aren't 25 better jobs when it comes to pay and location. 

Top 10 is probably a reach. 

To the point Derka just made, it depends on if you want to win or if you want to collect a check and live in a great city. If you want to win, it ain't a top 10 program. The culture just isn't there. Maybe it could be someday. 

Here's another good one: Texas hadn't gone 3 straight seasons without an NCAA tournament win since 1988. 

Woof.

Edited January 14, 2019 by ztejas

[ClubWhatever 12306]

I gave you a pos rep but Austin is not better than Chapel Hill.  

[jinx 2636]

On 1/12/2019 at 4:41 PM, ztejas said:

It's funny to me how much action this thread gets after a weekend loss to Tech.

Tech isn't and was never going to be the nail in the coffin. Tech is good. They scheme well, they are coached well, they like winning. This is a team coming off an EE appearance. Texas was expected to lose.

Losing on the road to one of the worst Big 12 basketball teams I have ever seen, and quite possibly the worst Pokes team in their fucking history should have done it for anyone paying attention.

Inexcusable. Unexplainable. Indefensible. Unacceptable. 

The depths of the loss in Stillwater know no bounds. I watched the last 3 minutes jfk and couldn't beleive what I was seeing. Okie Lite was so piss poor bad it felt like a fever dream watching Texas' inability to win.

I checked out after the loss in Stillwater last year.  I watched this year's team until we got beaten at home by the shitty school that we hired this clown from.

In case you forgot what happened last year at Okie State, we were up 62-50 with 5:55 to go in the game.  ESPN called this a 96.6% win probability.  We lost 64-65.  If this game was somehow shittier, I am glad I didn't bother watching it.

Recap on Stillwater 2018 if you are a sadist:

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/game?gameId=400989233

 

[Fozzz 152]

13 minutes ago, Goo Punch said:

it's one of the best jobs in the country because of a number of factors.

1)You get to live in Austin, Texas

2)We will pay you a top 10 salary

3)You have the ability to win an NCAA title here

4)You have none of the expectation that find at a blue blood school- if you make the tourney consistently you're gold

5)Texas is the most fertile recruiting ground in the country. Every year you can stay home and recruit top flight players.

6)Nobody has struggled to recruit here since Barnes arrived. The school, city, facilities, and tradition (yes, tradition) sell themselves

7)As noted, we have more money than any other athletic department

8)We're about to open a shiny new arena

 

IMO that's a top 10-15 job nationally, closer to top 10. There isn't a school you can name that's a better job that has anywhere close to the job security you'd have in Texas, not to mention the fact that Austin > Durham, Chapel Hill, Lawrence, Lexington, etc. Any gig that's a "better" gig will come with much higher demand and a shittier city. Texas is a dream job for any coach who can win here. 

But by the same token, if Shaka were to make the tourney this season and next (even as a bubble team), he would need to keep his job, yes?

[Goo Punch 4275]

16 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I think top 25 is fair. I don't think there are more than 25 teams in the country easier to win at. There certainly aren't 25 better jobs when it comes to pay and location. 

Top 10 is probably a reach. 

To the point Derka just made, it depends on if you want to win or if you want to collect a check and live in a great city. If you want to win, it ain't a top 10 program. The culture just isn't there. Maybe it could be someday. 

Here's another good one: Texas hadn't gone 3 straight seasons without an NCAA tournament win since 1988. 

Woof.

right, but even by your own admission the guy who does come here and win more than Barnes did will in doing so make this a top 10 job. How many schools in this conference could legitimately win a title in hoops any time soon? KU, Texas, maybe Oklahoma? These are the only three schools that have had consistent tourney success for any sustained period of time since the league's inception. The fact that you can conceivably win it all at Texas is a huge perk. I don't see Buzz or Musselman winning an NCAA title at VT or Nevada; I don't see Prohm doing it at ISU; I definitely don't see Hoiberg doing it with the T Wolves; it's a factor that holds pretty significant weight. 

[jinx 2636]

17 hours ago, 2inDaPink1inDaStink said:

I think we start next season without a single starter from this team. The fab five 2.0 ain’t walking through the door next year. 

I negged you two times for stupid shit you wrote.  Thanks for the third opportunity, it was for the stupid ass name.

[Goo Punch 4275]

8 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

But by the same token, if Shaka were to make the tourney this season and next (even as a bubble team), he would need to keep his job, yes?

No. He's an objectively bad coach. We pay millions for head coaches because we expect them to be great coaches. His entire head coaching resume based on stats and facts alone would have him ranked outside the top, i dinno, 70+ coaches in America? Maybe more? He's nowhere near the level of coach that Texas aspires to have. 

[ztejas 44227]

1 hour ago, Goo Punch said:

right, but even by your own admission the guy who does come here and win more than Barnes did will in doing so make this a top 10 job. How many schools in this conference could legitimately win a title in hoops any time soon? KU, Texas, maybe Oklahoma? These are the only three schools that have had consistent tourney success for any sustained period of time since the league's inception. The fact that you can conceivably win it all at Texas is a huge perk. I don't see Buzz or Musselman winning an NCAA title at VT or Nevada; I don't see Prohm doing it at ISU; I definitely don't see Hoiberg doing it with the T Wolves; it's a factor that holds pretty significant weight. 

Winning more than Barnes did is a tall order. 

Of the 3 B12 schools you mention only one has won a title.

Sure you can conceivably win it all at Texas, but it's difficult. It would have to be a coach that wanted to prove he could win it all - not a coach that wanted that to be the expectation (like it would be at a dozen or so programs). 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 hours ago, Goo Punch said:

it's one of the best jobs in the country because of a number of factors.

1)You get to live in Austin, Texas

2)We will pay you a top 10 salary

3)You have the ability to win an NCAA title here

4)You have none of the expectation that find at a blue blood school- if you make the tourney consistently you're gold

5)Texas is the most fertile recruiting ground in the country. Every year you can stay home and recruit top flight players.

6)Nobody has struggled to recruit here since Barnes arrived. The school, city, facilities, and tradition (yes, tradition) sell themselves

7)As noted, we have more money than any other athletic department

8)We're about to open a shiny new arena

 

IMO that's a top 10-15 job nationally, closer to top 10. There isn't a school you can name that's a better job that has anywhere close to the job security you'd have in Texas, not to mention the fact that Austin > Durham, Chapel Hill, Lawrence, Lexington, etc. Any gig that's a "better" gig will come with much higher demand and a shittier city. Texas is a dream job for any coach who can win here. 

1.  Lots of great places to live in the country. Great city, but Austin isn't the garden of Eden.  Coaches pick programs where they can win, facilities, dollars spent. The city is often a secondary factor, more to placate the wives.  Saban is in friggin Alabama.

2.  Yep that's a factor

3. Really, when was the last time that happened ?

4. Barnes got you there fairly regularly, and they fired him.

5.  True, but that hasn't translated to a national title in Texas has it.

6. Yep true

7. Yep money hasn't gotten you there yet.

 

 

8.  That's a nice feature if you can fill it, if not it's a huge empty boring  place that the TV never shows above the bench level.

[Goo Punch 4275]

you don't think an NCAA title can be won at Texas? i'm curious as to why that is. 

[ClubWhatever 12306]

4 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

4. Barnes got you there fairly regularly, and they fired him.

He was here for 18 years and raised 2 kids here

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

4 minutes ago, ClubWhatever said:

He was here for 18 years and raised 2 kids here

I thought the guy did a pretty good job of getting to the dance fairly regularly at a football dominant school, that's an achievement.  I'd be pretty happy if my team made it to the dance consistently ,and got to at least the second weekend a good portion of that time, and made the sweet 16 a few of those years.  

National championships are great but unless you're a basketball centric school you're just not getting that many of those. Florida pulled it off with Billie Donovan, that was quite the achievement.

 

[Goo Punch 4275]

There are a few programs in each of the major conferences where winning a title is plausibly achievable within a short period of time. Texas is one of those programs. We have a huge budget, a major brand, we've recruited well for two straight decades now, and we have an awesome AD who has more than proven himself. Acknowledging that a title could be won at Texas doesn't mean that we're on the level of Kentucky, Kansas, and Duke, it simply means that we are in a group with those teams, along with programs like OU, Florida, Michigan, Gonzaga, et al. I don't think a body out there seriously doubts that any one of these programs could win a title with the right coach. 

Edited January 15, 2019 by Goo Punch

[Herminator 17]

4 hours ago, Bitterwhiteguy said:

If I understand correctly, the remaining guaranteed money for Shaka is around $14.5m now (we're halfway through the season) and $13m after the season ends. Perrin extended Shaka by a year, so 3-ish mil of that is on him, not Patterson. As for why he got so much guaranteed money, that's becoming par for the course in luring coaches out of spots they enjoy. Chris Mack got something conceptually similar to leave Xavier for Louisville, and whoever you want to replace Shaka will demand the same. If you want Beard, assuming he says yes (which isn't a given) his buyout will be in the neighborhood of $6 mil, so the price of replacing Shaka is more like $20 mil before you pay Beard a dime of salary.

All of this says to me that you're in for one more year of Shaka at the very least.

I think Beard’s buyout is way more than $6m since he signed an extension after last season to 2023/24 for about $16M. 

[2inDaPink1inDaStink 106]

Sorry when I went to pick a name the ultra creative and super duper smart sounding “jinx” was already taken .

The reality is this, stop the tape of tonight’s game at 8:53 in the 1st half. It pretty much explains Shaka and this whole current team’s issues. DO takes on a quadripple team. Still pushes the issue and shoots the most ridiculous shot. 

Stop the sunshine pumping crap. I don’t care if they come back and win a blowout against Kansas this garbage is not competitive basketball nor will it ever be championship basketball. 

[kingkoopa6 8700]

oops

Edited January 15, 2019 by kingkoopa6

[2inDaPink1inDaStink 106]

There is just no way DO is that bad? I don’t buy it. Sorry boys, starting to think he might be.. nah, I won’t say it, I’m sure there are plenty of horns fans thinking it, but are too afraid to make an accusation like that about a player on their team.