What you need to know
Kowalczyk could be a hot name in three weeks if Toledo makes a Tourney run, however, even without a splash, his resume and accomplishments deserve consideration for BC. A Midwest guy, Kowalczyk has enough ties and experience in the New England and the Northeast that BC wouldn't be foreign territory (assistant at UNH, St. Anselm and Rutgers). His time at Marquette is also an important career stop as it gave him major confernece recruiting and a familiarity with working at a Jesuit school. Unlike some other midmajor names, Kowalczyk will understand the type of talent it will take to win at BC. As a MAC Coach, I am sure that Bates has some familiarity with him and his reputation. I don't know if there is anything more to the relationship.
Pros
-- Long run in the Wisconsin University System, which has been a good incubator of coaching talent (Bennett, Pearl, Ryan)
-- Consistent winner at two different programs
-- Has recruited in New England
Cons
-- Despite consistent winning, no NCAA Tournament appearances as a Head Coach
-- Teams tended to follow a Donahue, Skinner model of good offenses and poor defenses
-- No ACC ties
-- No ties to BC
-- Unknown to most BC fans
Overall
Kowalczyk is not the type of coach you hire to sell seats in Year 1. I don't think he's a sure thing nor necessarily the way BC will go initially. But if we cannot land a Pearl or Howland, this is the type of coach we should strongly consider. In 12 seasons as a Head Coach, Kowalczyk only has three losing seasons. Above style or offensive efficiency or the ability to recruit, we need to reestablish a culture of winning. Kowalczyk brings that culture. He will be a head coach in a major conference soon. BC might be the right fit for him and for us.
Posts
9 comments:
One negative is he was an assistant at Rutgers under Kevin Bannon and was part of the naked sprints/missed free throws whatever thing that happened that resulted in a lawsuit.
We can do better than this.
Great performances at the Combine by the BC entrees. Ramsey is the strongest defensive player on the field. KPL is the fastest LB and about the strongest ( 28 reps on the bench).AW, Edebali and Patcham all have strong outings. NFL network spent an inordinate amount of time telling everyone what an athletic specimen and a " freak" Clowney was. He ran 4.53 and benched 21 reps. KPL does 4.51 and 28 reps but no one refers to him as a specimen. NFL network talks about him as a seventh round draft pick. The fastest, strongest LB with quality production in college as a late rounder? Doesn't compute. 2. An announcer noted that 21% of the attendees at the Combine came from the SEC. He was quite impressed with that number. But less than a month ago ESPN was telling us that half of the top rated 300 on letter of intent day were going to the SEC. The majority of those 4 and 5 star recruits don't even get an invite to the combine. ( the SEC goes from 50 % down to 21%) If all the speed and athleticism is in the SEC as we were told by the broadcasters in the FSU-Auburn game how did the top two times in the 40 for LBs come from ACC guys ( KPL and Smith)? Could the coaching be so poor in the SEC that the vast majority of 4 and 5 star recruits can't get to the Combine or is it that the entire evaluation system for recruits at ESPN is a fraud? 3. Why is it that college coaches from the SEC and Big East that move to the NFL fail but that college coaches from the Pac 12, ACC and Big 12 succeed? Schiano, Marrone and Mac Pherson compiled losing records as did Spurrier and Sabin. Yet Johnson of Miami. Coughlin of BC, Switzer of Oklahoma, Carroll of USC, Kelley of Oregon and Harbaugh of Stanford have won? Could it be that certain conferences are overhyped and that the NFL owners are just as susceptible to what Stoops described as the propaganda campaigns of the networks as anyone else? 4. How does one account for the miserable failure of all of Coach Bellichik's acolytes? Mangini, Peoli, McDaniel, Crennell, Weiss. Tannenbaum ( traded for Tebow) and Dimitroff( trade 5 high picks for a WR)? How could Bellichik put together such an ineffective defense these past 6 years. Could it be that his haul of SEC players Hernandez, Mayo, Hightower, Spikes and Cunningham were not that talented? Would he have been better off getting LBs that were fast ( Keuchley, KPL and T. Smith) than those plodding types from the SEC? Has he overrated the talent at Rutgers and Syracuse? If you are incapable of discerning what conferences are strong misevaluation of talent is the inevitable result.
Point #2 by NED is an interesting one, especially since roughly 300 players attend the combine each year. I wonder how much of it is a flawed evaluation system, how much is the inherent crapshoot of trying to project the development of 17 year-olds, and how much is the huge amount of talent in the SEC leading to a lot of talented players not playing (if the #10 MLB comes to BC he'll probably play for 4 years; if he goes to Alabama he might not play at all if they get the #1 and #3 MLBs in the next recruiting class). I think the overall % of top 300 recruits who make the combine would be illuminating.
Pass. As for Ned, observation 2 made be interesting but the rest is unintelligible.
Bravesbill obviously has a superiority complex which is surprising given that his own sentence is complete gibberish
Never let facts get in the way of a very long paragraph.
Thanks for pointing out the typo eagle. It should read "may." Hopefully this will increase the quality of your posts.
Napoleon hit the nail on the head. We can do better. And if we are considering a guy who was part of the Rutgers debacle than Bruce Pearl should be a candidate. I am biased because I Iove BC, but this is such a better job than the media makes it out to be. For crying out loud, this is an ACC Head Coaching Job - we do not have to settle!!!!! Are you hearing me, Brad Bates? Go sell the school and program - it is not a hard sell.
Post a Comment