We have a winless ACC on which to judge Jim Christian. But is that fair? Some Christian apologist might say he was dealt a bad hand and did his best. An SB Nation blogger put together a good chart of all the Power 5 and Big East coaches who just completed their second years. Even without Wins and Losses, Christian still struggles under the Kenpom statistics and in recruiting rankings.
This season was such a letdown, but not just because of the losing, Watching the team struggle would have been okay had their been any hope or sign that we are headed in the right direction. However, as the charts show, Christian doesn't have the new to BC excuse any more, He's had two bad years even by elite coaching standards.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
34 comments:
To paraphrase Sheed, "chart don't lie". The JC hire is indefensible at this point. He better right the ship next year or he can join Kim Anderson in looking for a job as an assistant somewhere, or he can just bide his time on BCs dime at home.
Seems like BC's decade long experiment in hiring coaches for football and basketball who would not even have been interviewed for any other Power 5 job is not working out. I suppose Donahue was the lone exception to that, but, after Jones left, he made up for it by hiring assistants who definitely would not have been considered for any other Power 5 role.
So, this game of rolling the dice with people who nobody else would hire is not working out. I'm shocked --- shocked! The sad thing is that the Administration actually appears to be.
What I always struggle with in terms of coaching searches (particularly basketball) is who are the natural fits? Whenever a power 5 job opens up, it's seems there are 2-3 "natural fits" that have a solid resume and make a relatively smooth transition. When Donahue was hired there were a bunch of names bantered around before he emerged as the front-runner. With JC it seemed like half a dozen names were linked. I remember most interpreting that many of those names were offered the job and declined or pulled themselves out of the running before getting to that step.
Bruce Pearl was the obvious guy last time around but a variety of factors seemed to ensure the stars wouldn't align whether it be cost, past-scandals, and/or admissions standards. Unfortunate, but understandable. If Christian were to be fired this year or next year, who are the logical fits? Who would be a solid candidate(s) and who would be the great candidate(s) that we would need to go above and beyond the typical BC head coaching salary for or have the stars align for?
Pearls past is exactley what doesn't make him a "natural fit".
The answer that people here will give you to your "natural fit" question will undoubtedly be alumni names. I personally don't see the appeal in hiring someone just because they're an alumni. There is no secret to coaching basketball here. The only thing BC needs in its next coaching hire, is the ability to open the checkbook. Aside from a major overhaul to facilities, hiring a monster name is the best/fastest way to make up for the Donahue mistake and the JC mistake (if it in fact turns out to be one because it's still too early to tell).
GP11
One person was involved in the firing of Al, and the hiring of the next 2, and that's Leahy. He and Bates need to be gone before a new hire is made. I was not squeamish about Pearl at all, and would have loved to have seen him hired. If it wasn't obvious before, people should realize now, that the ACC is a mini NBA, and BC needs a new attitude if it wants to be competitive. I'm not interested in browny points for good "student athlete's" and "nice people". I don't want to cheat, but I'm sick of the whole choir boy routine. I want a winner, most likely a big name, and could care less about style points
BC has horrible facilities; has incredibly poor relationships with all local AAU programs; and has no institutional support. Other than these issues, it's an easy place to win.
Joe... Again, my point is "Open the checkbook" is a great rallying cry for us, and I don't disagree. But for who? Who are REAL options to open the checkbook for? And if BC is not going to go bonkers, but rather, upgrade to a more middle of the pack salary slot, who are the potential candidates?
The world of college athletics has changed more in the past 10 years than in the previous 30 combined. BC responded to that change by painting a few cinderblocks and throwing up a few pictures. And doing nothing else.
As for the good assistants -- yup, great. One more example of BC being penny-wise and pound foolish. Underspend and limit yourself to a career MAC head coach, and then pray that spending a few hundred extra grand on good assistants will solve the problem. Shocking that didn't work.
BC athletics are a small time operation. The sooner everybody involved becomes aware of that, including the fanbase, the better.
The AAU thing will no be worked out by assistants and/or a good coach. All those losers associated with AAU programs, who like to hang onto the fortunes of 17 year olds, will never point a kid in BCs direction when they have the option to play somewhere that is committed to the sport thru facilities. Maybe assistants will help find under the radar type guys (like with Skinner), but top local talent will never come to BC with current facilities and lack of commitment from the school.
If BC isn't planning a basketball only facility built into the new recreation complex, they might as well just fold up shop.
So Hoib, you are embracing the "winning is everything mentality" of the football/basketball factories? Disgusting.
Georgia Eagle
When you play in the factory league you better adopt their tactics or else get used to be a national joke. Nothing is more disgusting to me than taking in 20 million plus and having zero wins to show for it.
100% agree with Hoib. GaEagle, that is such a loser thing to say. You can have a competitive mentality and not be a factory (see Duke, Stanford, Northwestern, etc).
And to be clear, BC doesn't need to be on the cutting edge of anything like many of the baby rapist football schools who have state funding and a number of advantages. They just need to keep up with the joneses, and they have failed miserably to date in even just doing that.
Joe, you just made my point for me. BC should aspire to the successful student-athlete models of Stanford, Duke and Northwestern, not the hired-gun models of Kentucky, FSU and Miami.
Comparing BC to Duke and Stanford is pure fantasy. Miami is a much better comparison. I'll give you. Northwestern, even that's a bit of a stretch. When it comes to Hoops who would want to compare to the only major school never to make the NCAAs.
Hoib, you know darn well I'm referring to Northwestern the football team. Academically, BC compares favorably to the likes of Northwestern, Stanford and Duke. There is no cogent reason why we can not also match them athletically.
Wrong. BC should aspire to be the factories, something that ND and Stanford have been able to do (recruit at a nationally elite level) but also maintain standards.
Look at all the comparable academic schools. They all have recruited better than BC the last few years because they aspire to be elite football programs (like the factories). How do they do that, by investing in their program and getting their pick of the elite talent/academic players in the country. Both can be done, but you need support from the school, like the aforementioned schools get
Miami is a comparison only in that their football team isn't supported like it should be. Those other schools are all better academically, but it is fair to lump BC into that group (private, P5 football with similar restrictions).
To be clear, I'm ref football in my arguments (although basketball is same discussion).
USNWR Stanford4. Duke 8 BC30. Miami 51
Miami is in the ACC, private school in a major city w/ pro teams. Our endowment is 2.5 times theirs yet they substantially out spend us in athletics. We should be able to do everything they do, yet we don't. They are our closest competitor IMO.
You want BC to become the Miami of Neww England? Omg, son. What are you thinking? Again. Stanford should be our goal - the best of both worlds.
Joe, buddy. Am I missing something? You Andy I are on the same page. I have no argument with your logic.
GT
I want to beat Miami, and every other team in the ACC. you seem ok w/ losing to them all. How many recruiting battles have we won against Standord?
Meant GE
Negative, Mr. Hoib. I simply want us to be as successful as Stanford while maintaining academic integrity. There is no sound reason why we can't recruit as successfully as Stanford. None.
Here's one.
Recently the NYT published a story about dream schools. In it was a survey that found that Stanford was the #1 choice of all 17 year olds in the U.S. In short they have the pick of the litter. So go ahead and set impossible standards for us, but don't be upset when we lose.
We agree to disagree. Time to move on.
Touche! Finally, someone seed my point.
Sees
*Duke (not Stanford twice) ha!
I'm not anti intellectual, I just think being one has nothing to do w/ sports. Poland had a lofty goal when they stood up to the Nazis, where did it get them. The Axis were finally stopped when someone w/ the horses was able to take them down, the USA.
GE
Don't know how old you are, but I go back a ways. When I went to BC, it was felt that it was somehow impure if BC had hockey players who were from Canada. We'll after years of BU's Canadiens players beating our brains out we relented. 4. National title's and counting I think we made the right choice. Again I'm advocating playing by the rules, but I do believe if you can't beat em join em.
Post a Comment