I do not understand why there is so much dislike being displayed in here about the possibility of Gary Henderson permanently getting the baseball head coaching job. In less than five months on the job, he has MSU playing in the College World Series. That is something that Ron Polk accomplished only six times in his twenty-nine years as our head coach. If Cannizaro was still on the job and had gotten us there this year, in only his second year on the job, everyone that is criticizing Henderson would be talking about the great job that Cannizaro had done. Henderson is not a flashy guy, he isn't going to tweet out pics of himself in the weight room or various Twitter/social media nonsense like that but he is a mature, solid guy that deserves the MSU job. I know that some will point to his record at Kentucky, and argue that he isn't up to the job because of his tenure at Kentucky. If anyone had cared enough about women's basketball when Vic Schaefer was hired, they could have argued that his 80-110 at Sam Houston job disqualified him for the MSU job, and look at what he has accomplished here. If our goal in hiring a head coach is to find someone that has coached in the College World Series, that man is already on the campus and the interim should be taken off his title.
Why the Henderson Hate?
- Thread starter CoolDawg
- Start date
There really is no question about this anymore. Kentucky was a solid SEC baseball program while he was there, and if they had not forced him out, he probably accomplishes the same amount as Goat Mingione last year and exceeds him this year. He won the Assistant COY award while at Flarrda, and won SEC COY while at Kentucky (in a year where they were screwed out of hosting by the committee). He's known as a great recruiter. He relates to the kids well, they play hard for him. We've already had a couple of recruits decide they want to play for MSU instead of going pro, Henderson obviously had something to do with that. He understands Cohen. He's molded our pitching staff, ravaged by injury, into something that is competing for the national championship.
It's an easy decision
It's an easy decision
This would be kinda awesome though. Some tweets of Henderson throwing up 250 on the bench would make my day.
It's not hate. I don't know anybody that has said they hate the guy. Some of us just don't think he's a good enough coach to be the HC going forward. Unlike you, 5049 below and others, we are basing our opinion on his entire career, not the performance of the team over the past dozen or so games. There is simply nowhere near enough production for him to consider him a great coach.
Kinda the same way Gene Chizik wasn't a great coach, yet Auburn won an NC under him. Sometimes the players are just good enough, lucky enough, gritty enough, etc to win despite not having a great coach. But that can't be sustained over the long haul.
Kinda the same way Gene Chizik wasn't a great coach, yet Auburn won an NC under him. Sometimes the players are just good enough, lucky enough, gritty enough, etc to win despite not having a great coach. But that can't be sustained over the long haul.
The only type of coach who should be selected ahead of Henderson is a coach who has either won a national championship or been to multiple CWS as a head coach. Somebody like Tim Corbin. Henderson trumps any so-called up and coming head coach who has never been to the CWS, because, as we know Gary Henderson has a CWS appearance as a head coach to go along with several CWS appearances as an assistant.
Edit to add: Henderson also led Kentucky to its best season win wise in school history, and was voted SEC coach of the year. He was also named assistant coach of the year while he was at Florida. He has quite a few accolades.
Edit to add: Henderson also led Kentucky to its best season win wise in school history, and was voted SEC coach of the year. He was also named assistant coach of the year while he was at Florida. He has quite a few accolades.
Last edited:
LMAO. No question? Easy decision? Shallow thinking. As I posted above, this is, "Gene Chizik" kind of hire. NC, then 2 seasons later a 3-9 (0-8)8) 8) record. Gene had great success as a DC at AU, and a good year as DC at Texas. But his record as an HC was not good, yet AU gave him the HC job. After that NC they thought they had a great hire. Two years later they were buying out his contract at a cost of over $11 million.
Last edited:
Didn't Cohen say the next guy would have experience in Omaha? When he said it, was he talking past tense or was he being prophetic?
You're a 17ing moron. First of all I did not discount coaching in baseball. I made my case based on what he has done as an HC for the 10 years he has been one, rather than the 2-3 weeks you are so enamored with.
Want to know what, "stupid and lazy" looks like? Look in the mirror. You're the one ready to proclaim CGH an elite coach based on this short period of time, rather than the 10 years of evidence he is not.
Here's a question for you. Is Gene Chizik a great, elite coach? He won a NC in his 2nd year as HC at AU. Why on earth did AU fire him 2 years later? If a team making a championship is the barometer of a great coach, why was he unemployed 2 years later? Why did Au pay him $11 million to go away? Why did no other team snatch him up as their HC?
Want to know what, "stupid and lazy" looks like? Look in the mirror. You're the one ready to proclaim CGH an elite coach based on this short period of time, rather than the 10 years of evidence he is not.
Here's a question for you. Is Gene Chizik a great, elite coach? He won a NC in his 2nd year as HC at AU. Why on earth did AU fire him 2 years later? If a team making a championship is the barometer of a great coach, why was he unemployed 2 years later? Why did Au pay him $11 million to go away? Why did no other team snatch him up as their HC?
Last edited:
I'm gonna support whatever decision Cohen makes concerning the baseball HC. That said, I see both sides.
I see wanting and feeling we deserve a top level head coach with a proven track record that includes multiple CWS trips. Especially with the stadium we just built and the team he is going to take over in 2019.
I also see rewarding Henderson and his staff for a job extremely well done in a situation no one wants to be placed in. Coach has been a top assistant to guys named Andy Lopez, Pat Casey and John Cohen and Cohen snapped him up for a 2nd time immediately after UK parted ways. He is clearly a respected baseball mind among guys at the top of the game.
I'm just going to enjoy Omaha and leave the HC hire up to an AD who is seriously qualified to make this decision.
I see wanting and feeling we deserve a top level head coach with a proven track record that includes multiple CWS trips. Especially with the stadium we just built and the team he is going to take over in 2019.
I also see rewarding Henderson and his staff for a job extremely well done in a situation no one wants to be placed in. Coach has been a top assistant to guys named Andy Lopez, Pat Casey and John Cohen and Cohen snapped him up for a 2nd time immediately after UK parted ways. He is clearly a respected baseball mind among guys at the top of the game.
I'm just going to enjoy Omaha and leave the HC hire up to an AD who is seriously qualified to make this decision.
He made 2 regionals in 8 years at UK. The SEC averaged +/- 8 teams per year over that span too (8 out of 12 for half those years, BTW). He was .500 or under 7 out of 8 years in SEC play.
I appreciate the job he's done. But we need a long term guy. I don't see that in him.
I appreciate the job he's done. But we need a long term guy. I don't see that in him.
And he did this after being handed the keys to a complete rebuild by the IB. IB inherited a dumpster fire at UK, so his first two years of the rebuild were just what one would expect...awful. Then IB won 44 games in 2 of the last 3 years, including the year before CGH too the reins. How can anybody think what UK did in those 8 years under CGH makes hi a great coach, and if not, how can anyone look at just this year anbd conclude the same? Because we got hot and lucky the last 2-3 weeks, and narrowly avoided elimination a few times?
I'll say again...while he had one great year at UK that got him SEC COY, that was the ONLY year he had much success. Every other year UK was mediocre at best.
I'll say again...while he had one great year at UK that got him SEC COY, that was the ONLY year he had much success. Every other year UK was mediocre at best.
I’ll be honest. I have no idea what to think about the situation.
The eye test for makes me nervous about fire in the belly, and I’ll just say that he seems to have a lack of situational awareness at times. In addition, aside from 2012, his head coaching career leaves a lot to be desired.
That said, players seem to really like him, the staff has done an excellent job bringing various players along throughout the season, and he’s now in the Elite 8 of college baseball after what was looking like a throwaway season.
If I’m AD, I still don’t think Henderson’s the guy for next season, but I’m no longer going to be upset if he gets the gig
The eye test for makes me nervous about fire in the belly, and I’ll just say that he seems to have a lack of situational awareness at times. In addition, aside from 2012, his head coaching career leaves a lot to be desired.
That said, players seem to really like him, the staff has done an excellent job bringing various players along throughout the season, and he’s now in the Elite 8 of college baseball after what was looking like a throwaway season.
If I’m AD, I still don’t think Henderson’s the guy for next season, but I’m no longer going to be upset if he gets the gig
No, but yours is. You offer no explanation as to why my post is "extremely dumb". Are you arguing that it is not possible for players to excel in spite of not having a great coach? I have already provided an example that proves this is true. Could provide more.
So, my statement is provable. Yours is not. That makes yours dumb, not mine.
So, my statement is provable. Yours is not. That makes yours dumb, not mine.
Last edited:
What's your deal with Chizik? So funny. Saban = great (except dolphins) Petino = great (except Celtics) Brad Stevens = great at Butler: great at Celtics Mora, Carroll, Sherrill, Ditka, Maddon, etc.
Dozens upon dozens of example where it has worked...and not worked...for good, great, average, and bad coaches.
My kids like their mom more than me. But then she has never, ever made them do a chore, always encourages them to make excuses for bad decisions, and cares more about being liked by them than molding them into successful adults.
Their entire lives I've been the only parent who has held them accountable for their actions, required them to accept personal responsibility, and doled out any punishment (FWIW, I don't hit or spank, I take away privileges, ground, etc.)
Though I admit not reading everything I can find, I don't recall a ton of quotes from players crediting CGH with being a great coach. I have read and heard comments about Gautreau, teammates not giving up on each other, players overcoming having 3 different coaches in 3 years, fans sticking with them, Mangum paying a huge leadership role, etc.
I have no doubt the kids probably genuinely like CGH, and appreciate him believing in them, and creating a no-pressure environment that made it more fun and gave them the rope they needed this year to pull themselves up. But that was possible because we had no expectations for this team this year after Canni screwed us. We've been playing with house money all year. It won't be that way going forward, and if it is, then it will mean we are not doing well.
CGH's HC record with a team that was doing well when he took over is not very good. That's not the kind of coach we need for the future.
Their entire lives I've been the only parent who has held them accountable for their actions, required them to accept personal responsibility, and doled out any punishment (FWIW, I don't hit or spank, I take away privileges, ground, etc.)
Though I admit not reading everything I can find, I don't recall a ton of quotes from players crediting CGH with being a great coach. I have read and heard comments about Gautreau, teammates not giving up on each other, players overcoming having 3 different coaches in 3 years, fans sticking with them, Mangum paying a huge leadership role, etc.
I have no doubt the kids probably genuinely like CGH, and appreciate him believing in them, and creating a no-pressure environment that made it more fun and gave them the rope they needed this year to pull themselves up. But that was possible because we had no expectations for this team this year after Canni screwed us. We've been playing with house money all year. It won't be that way going forward, and if it is, then it will mean we are not doing well.
CGH's HC record with a team that was doing well when he took over is not very good. That's not the kind of coach we need for the future.
Last edited:
I'm just going to suggest that you have made it very clear where you stand on the coaching situation and no more effort is necessary. I don't think any minds are going to change at this point and Cohen ain't listening to us anyway.
Why not make a few comments on what a great season we're having and how exciting Omaha is going to be? Just a suggestion, obviously, take it or leave it.
Put on your thinking cap and reread the post. Chizik is a great example of how a team can achieve at the highest level even with a coach who isn't great. This is central to the argument that we should not judge CGH on our post-season run rather than his entire history as a head coach.
Chizik's 2010 team went 14-0 and won the NC. Did that make him a great coach? Was he the right coach for AU going forward, or is it not plain now that the 2010 AU team won in spite of Chizik, not because of him?
The point is, judging a head coach candidate based on an extremely small sample size is incredibly unwise, particularly when there is 10 year's worth of history that suggests he's not a great HC.
Chizik's 2010 team went 14-0 and won the NC. Did that make him a great coach? Was he the right coach for AU going forward, or is it not plain now that the 2010 AU team won in spite of Chizik, not because of him?
The point is, judging a head coach candidate based on an extremely small sample size is incredibly unwise, particularly when there is 10 year's worth of history that suggests he's not a great HC.
I have. I even posted I thought it was a shame we had to have another thread like this that divides us so soon after the great win, rather than all bask in the glory.
As far as my posting my opinion goes, I wouldn't continue to post it if there weren't continued posts arguing the issue. If everybody wants to drop it and focus on the positive, I'm all for that! But if folks want to continue to debate it, I'm good with that, too.
As far as my posting my opinion goes, I wouldn't continue to post it if there weren't continued posts arguing the issue. If everybody wants to drop it and focus on the positive, I'm all for that! But if folks want to continue to debate it, I'm good with that, too.
Really? "Sometimes the players are just good enough, lucky enough, gritty enough, etc to win despite not having a great coach." That is exactly what you said.
I didn't even give my opinion of Henderson. I do believe that people can change and get better at their job.....whatever that job is. This is not Kentucky and he's not the same guy he was back then.
Never said that.
Henderson is not Chizik.....I'm not sure how this is relevant.
Thanks for making my point. Your reply was stupid and lazy.
Chizik is not a valid comparison. Auburn won that national title because they had a transcendent athlete at quarterback, one of the best players in SEC history. This MSU team has some talent, but nothing at all compared to that. Our highest draft pick went in the third round and he hasn't even been that good this year. Henderson and the assistants have done an outstanding job of leading a team that has talent but not top-end talent, especially in the pitching staff, to the CWS.
Where exactly do you see Cam Newton on this roster?
I'm still not sold on Henderson either, but this comparison is just absurd.
You are completely missing the point. The entire point about Chizik is to demonstrate a HC can have a great season, yet that does not mean he is a great coach. When we judge Chizik as a HC, do we only look at the NC year, ignoring the rest?
Under CGH we are having an exciting post-season to go along with a strong finish to the regular season. But even then, our regular season was not great. Overall it wasn't even particularly good. It only got pretty good overall after we swept a UF team that, if we're being honest, was less concerned about winning the series vs us as they had already clinched the SEC and the overall #1 seed in the country. Sure, we played very well and beat a great team nonetheless, but we also didn't get their best, including Singer. Had we lost to Singer, we finish with a losing SEC record, and are quite possibly not in the NCAA tourney.
That's how close it was to being a real downer.
But again, the point here is not to compare Chizik's performance to Henderson's, rather it is to show how a coach's capability and value as a HC can be over-stated when one does not look at the entire body of work. 2010 Chizik was SEC & National COY. 2012 Chizik was fired, and unable to get another HC job.
If you needed to hire a football coach tomorrow, would you look only at 2010 Chizik, or would you look at all 6 of his years as an HC?
Under CGH we are having an exciting post-season to go along with a strong finish to the regular season. But even then, our regular season was not great. Overall it wasn't even particularly good. It only got pretty good overall after we swept a UF team that, if we're being honest, was less concerned about winning the series vs us as they had already clinched the SEC and the overall #1 seed in the country. Sure, we played very well and beat a great team nonetheless, but we also didn't get their best, including Singer. Had we lost to Singer, we finish with a losing SEC record, and are quite possibly not in the NCAA tourney.
That's how close it was to being a real downer.
But again, the point here is not to compare Chizik's performance to Henderson's, rather it is to show how a coach's capability and value as a HC can be over-stated when one does not look at the entire body of work. 2010 Chizik was SEC & National COY. 2012 Chizik was fired, and unable to get another HC job.
If you needed to hire a football coach tomorrow, would you look only at 2010 Chizik, or would you look at all 6 of his years as an HC?
You have missed the point, which is that it's extremely shallow and short-sighted to judge a potential HC on one short sample while ignoring all the years of actual results. Chizik has one great year, and everybody thought he was an elite coach. He won SEC & National COY awards, yet was fired 2 season later.
The relevance to CGH is that it is foolish to think he is a great coach based on this year, or even worse, the last 2-3 weeks. Ignoring his full 10 years as an HC, or not giving that way more weight than the past few weeks is a knee-jerk reaction that can lead to years of bad baseball, diminishing recruiting, and failure to fully capitalize on our shiny new stadium. The stadium will still be a jewel for years to come, but there will never be more excitement about it as there is right now.
Oh, and I suppose you could say Jake Mangum is our "Cam Newton" in baseball. Perhaps not as transcendent in skill as Cam, but I'd say Jake has it all over Cam in leadership.
The relevance to CGH is that it is foolish to think he is a great coach based on this year, or even worse, the last 2-3 weeks. Ignoring his full 10 years as an HC, or not giving that way more weight than the past few weeks is a knee-jerk reaction that can lead to years of bad baseball, diminishing recruiting, and failure to fully capitalize on our shiny new stadium. The stadium will still be a jewel for years to come, but there will never be more excitement about it as there is right now.
Oh, and I suppose you could say Jake Mangum is our "Cam Newton" in baseball. Perhaps not as transcendent in skill as Cam, but I'd say Jake has it all over Cam in leadership.
Last edited:
Teams only achieve at the highest level without a good coach when there is absolute game changing talent on the field. Cam Newton was the biggest 17ing physical mismatch in the history of college football. Then you had the best DT in the game too in Nick Fairley who was a Top 5 pick from the other side of the ball. We don’t have jack **** compared to that in the talent department on our baseball team. One Top 10 round pick, who was a guy that struggled most of the year. And comparing Jake Mangum’s impact to Cam Newton is beyond laughable. This team as a whole is borderline Top 7-8 team in the SEC in terms of talent....maybe. Nothing close to elite talent on this team outside of Pilk and maybe Small. All of the above only further highlights the job Henderson and the staff have done with this team.
Last edited:
This is a rugb thread. He (and all his other usermames) are gonna be real disappointed when Cohen gives the job to the guy who just spent a season earning it.
View attachment 10409
This is why the Henderson Hate. Gonna turn a program over to a guy based off 1 outlier season. If Martin doesn’t go full retard and sends in anyone else to pitch after the rain delay this conversation isn’t happening.
This is why the Henderson Hate. Gonna turn a program over to a guy based off 1 outlier season. If Martin doesn’t go full retard and sends in anyone else to pitch after the rain delay this conversation isn’t happening.
Last edited:
Handing him the job simply because we made the CWS is not wise. Like others have said, we wouldn't even be considering him if MacNamee had struck out at FSU. Why award him for some heroic player efforts, but ignore the many examples where he made poor decisions? It's a big decision based on short-term results. Do you think Bianco should be fired for not making Omaha with the best team he ever had? It's the same type of short-sighted reaction, just in the opposite extreme.
I greatly appreciate what Henderson has done, and I think he should be handsomely rewarded. I just don't think that reward should be the permanent job.
I greatly appreciate what Henderson has done, and I think he should be handsomely rewarded. I just don't think that reward should be the permanent job.
Doubling down on stupid again I see.
"Really? "Sometimes the players are just good enough, lucky enough, gritty enough, etc to win despite not having a great coach." That is exactly what you said."
Yep, that's what I said. How dense must you be to not understand that statement does not, "discount coaching in baseball."?
"Really? "Sometimes the players are just good enough, lucky enough, gritty enough, etc to win despite not having a great coach." That is exactly what you said."
Yep, that's what I said. How dense must you be to not understand that statement does not, "discount coaching in baseball."?
Careful. You're attempting to use logic and reason with a bunch of emotional little Nancies with their panties in a wad. How dare you suggest 99% of his head coaching history is more relavant than the 1% they want to focus on?**
And I'm not surprised you're a jackass apparently upset I don't share your opinion. Oh, and congrats on being the one poster on here who speaks for absolutely everybody. The pressure must be unbearable for you.
I have a question.Was Polk part 2 a success or failure?No long-winded answers,just a simple yes or no.