Originally posted by Aggs:
I'm looking at Bobby Hurley as an up-and-comer, not an established coach.
Cluess has five seasons at Iona and experience at the lower level, and has two NCAA appearances, and you make a good point about Larrananaga, but Miami was less of a rebuild than Rutgers. I think Jared Grasso is his "ace recruiter" - not sure if he would follow him.
Hurley, Jr. has two seasons at Buffalo in what I think is a better conference. I was actually surprised to see Buffalo No. 46 in Ken Pom's offensive efficiency rankings, while Iona is ahead but not by much (No. 40).
I'm not going to penalize Hurley Jr.'s because he only has two years under his belt compared to Cluess' five at Iona. I just prefer the younger hungrier guy who has turned Buffalo into a contender. He's not laid back - but I don't think he's Mike Rice - and we could use that down the road. I guess I'm more confident he will continue winning 20 games at Buffalo and would bet on him before it's too late. It's not the end of the world, but he checks a lot of the boxes.
Archie Miller made the Elite 8 in his third season at Dayton, his first HC gig, and the offers started rolling in.
I'm not saying he's Archie but I'd rather be a year early than a year late. But I understand it might look risky to some fans because we've been burned by guys like Bannon, Rice and Hill Jr.
This post was edited on 3/5 12:34 AM by Aggs
See it's not just Cluess 5 years at Iona. That is a big part of the picture obviously. He's probably going to win the regular season conference title 3 times and make the NCAA 3 times. He's also done well on the lower levels from high school to Division 2. I like that. It shows that he's been doing well all along in his career, not just at one stop. It reminds me of an Art Briles or Brian Kelly in football. No guarantees obviously but I like to see that kind of success, doing it over and over again. His winning percentages are also in that 70-80% range so it's not just barely keeping your head above water, he's been winning at a nice clip at all these stops.
I do "penalize" for lack of track record. It's only natural and as I say with any coaching hire, I'm always wary of flash in the pan and is the coach the constant to success or just a player of group of players who will eventually graduate. So just logically the longer the track record, the more comfortable you feel but still never a guarantee.
When Mike Rice was hired, I was a Skinner guy myself for the simple reason that he won in the BE with lesser recruits. But I didn't have problem with Mike Rice basketball wise, had no idea about his demeanor. In his 3 years at Robert Morris, he won 3 conference titles, 2 conference tourneys, made the NCAA twice and had a 70%+ winning percentage. So it was a nice resume. It still didn't work out here, even without the off court stuff, not sure how well he would have done. The first year looked promising but then after that I didn't feel the building up as much.
Whoever wins here to me has to do it with lesser recruits. Only a superstar coach is bringing the big names and I don't see that happening. So whoever you feel is the most capable of that is the one I think has the best chance to do something here.
This post was edited on 3/5 8:48 AM by rutgersguy1