BC finally locks in its 2020 schedule

Football scheduling is complicated under normal seasons. It is uncharted territory in 2020. But after lots of weeks of scrambling, BC finalized its lone non-conference game and will host Texas State on September 26. Yes, Texas State. As for the how and why...

Despite many BC fans finding the "+1" pointless, BC had to schedule someone. The conference owes ESPN a certain amount of inventory and the +1 is part of that deal. The original intent of the +1 was to preserve the traditional non-conference rivalry games. Obviously the SEC didn't find those games as critical, yet the ACC stuck with their model (because of TV money). It wasn't going to be a problem until numerous conferences and independents decided to cancel their fall season.

After Ohio and the MAC shutdown their season, BC's original intent was to schedule someone close, cheap and easy. UConn and UMass were floated most often and made sense. Both scrapped their season. There were plenty of other options, but it suddenly became very expensive and very risky. Good teams wanted the game but at a high price. With Alumni empty, BC wasn't going to pay over the top to have a tough mid-major give us a handful. Lots of people hoped for Army, but Army had its pick of who to play and will actually play 12 games this year.

That left lots of fringe FBS programs as targets. BC landed on Texas State. They were available on our desired date, they are not strong (3-9 last year) and should provide a nice early teaching moment for Hafley.

Will fans be excited about this one? No, but they can't come anyway. This is a made for TV tune up and will hopefully be just what BC needs at the time. Under normal circumstances I would be livid about this type of game. This year it make all the sense in the world and was a good early decision by Pat Kraft. 

Let's hope BC and its fans keep calm if there is a COVID outbreak

BC Football players are back on campus. That's great. The team and staffers are all wearing masks publicly and seemingly taking COVID-19 seriously. That's great. However, given what has happened at Alabama, Clemson and Kansas State, it is highly likely that BC will have players test positive for COVID-19. They are living in a communal environment and getting tested often, so asymptomatics won't slip through the cracks.

BC has a plan for an outbreak. If or when one happens, let them manage it and please avoid the knee jerk reaction of cancelling sports, cancelling school, or cancelling whatever. We are in a different position then when we were in March. Outbreaks amongst NBA players, NFL players and European soccer stars, reinforce that athletes are at an extremely low-risk for any repercussions and most have been asymptomatic. 

I know this is easy for me to say. I don't have a player on the team. But if I did, I would let him go back to campus and play. All three of my kids now are back playing youth sports and the reasons we love sports are even more profound when you haven't had them for months. BC Football is an economic engine and cynically that is most likely why it is back. But I hope what comes of this is how BC Football is also an important part of the community and a life changing opportunity for the players on the team.

Meet Pat Kraft...sort of

Monday was a first for BC fans, as the traditional introductory press conference was moved to a zoom call. Our new Athletic Director Pat Kraft -- still in Philadelphia -- did his best to bring the right sort of energy and emotion to the event. It was awkward, but probably a better test than most press conferences because Kraft handled the predictable and the surprises with ease and did it all without being able to “read the room.”

The hot button issues of COVID and student voices related to BLM both came up, and he provided perfectly appropriate and generic answers. With COVID, he doesn’t know BC’s specific plan but will deal with it immediately. He has been part of the national football planning committee so he has a good feel for what all schools are doing and planning and thinks there will be football this fall.

With regards to student voices amidst the BLM discussion, Kraft said he thinks it is important to listen to students and for students to be heard. Does this mean anything? I don’t know, but he came off as sincere. The guy hasn’t even been on campus yet, so for him to speak with any specificity about what BC student athletes feel, what the university is doing and what the mood among the BC community is would be inappropriate.

He seemed enthused about Jeff Hafley. That is probably most important. If Hafley is going to be special and build something special, he needs an AD who will do everything he can to support him. Kraft has worked with young, first-time head coaches before. He knows what they need and how to make them better.

He says he is committed to all sports. This is going to be a hot topic everywhere as sport after sport gets cut at other schools. I will post for another time, but I think BC needs a diverse and successful sports program as part of their pitch to be an elite residential focused college.

There was no reference or mention of Jim Christian. Christian is one of the few basketball coaches around the country whose job was actually saved by the pandemic. Kraft knows this. After getting the school year off to a good start, this will be top of mind. Is Christian a lame duck? I have no idea, but it was smart for Kraft to not tip his hand in the first zoom.

Finally, Kraft addressed his desire to be at BC. This was a natural segue due to Jarmond’s short tenure. It is sort of the natural over-correction to any hire. People were upset that Jarmond left early, so it makes sense that his successor exclaims BC is his destination job. I am unconcerned. Like Jarmond, I wish Kraft a successful tenure and happy time at BC. If he is so great at his job a bigger school comes calling, that is a nice problem to have.

Press conferences are important in that they often set the mood and expectations. Because this one was so atypical it was reassuring to see Kraft roll with it and still come out ahead. Maybe that ability to adapt to new circumstances and still succeed is the biggest takeaway of the day. Best of luck to him and at this point I have every reason to think he will succeed.

Please stop with the "BC shouldn’t be in the ACC" nonsense

I am breaking my Pat Kraft press conference reactions into two separate posts because the supposed controversy of “BC being in the ACC” has nothing to do with Kraft and everything to do with some BC fans and critics and the Northeast Media who still harp on BC being in the ACC.

Steve Buckley of The Athletic brought up the topic during the press conference and shielded himself (knowing it is a stupid debate) with the preface that criticism is often repeated in the comments section of any article he writes on BC. There is so much stupidity with this debate, I don’t even know where to begin.

First, some reminders. This is our 15th year in the ACC. That is longer than our history in the Big East as a Football Conference (1991-2004). If you want to talk history and ties, BC’s ties to the ACC are now deeper than they were to Big East Football. But for all of those who long for the good ol’ days, I would also like to remind you that fellow Big East members Pitt, Syracuse, Miami, and Virginia Tech are all in the ACC, as well as one of the teams that replaced us in the Big East (Louisville) and Notre Dame shifted its partial membership from the Big East to the ACC. The ACC is the old Big East! Only with more geographic diversity, better TV deals, more access to growing recruiting markets and places our Alumni live. The ACC also helped improve our school brand in regions where 20 years ago people were still confusing BC and BU.

For those who feel we might have been disloyal, let me remind you that every original member of Big East Football, aside from Temple, voluntarily left the conference. All, aside from Temple, ended up in Power 5 conferences. We did what was in the best interest of Boston College and its student athletes.

For those who long for the days of Big East basketball, I would like to point two things out. First when BC was good in the ACC, the intensity of the games and interest in the product was as good as it ever was in the old Big East. When we finally fix BC Basketball, the ACC basketball will be fun too. Second, the old Big East is not what the current Big East is. Don’t be fooled by UConn’s desperate move back into the conference. As fun as a game against Georgetown or Villanova might be right now, we have zero history with current Big East teams like Butler, Xavier, DePaul, Creighton, or Marquette. Are those the games you long for? Would those games fill up Conte?

If you want that (and I do think we need to play Providence annually), then BC can schedule lots of Big East games. Based on the current trends and speculation, lots of sports are going to revert back to regional non-conference scheduling, so games against UConn, St. John’s and Providence are more likely than they were pre-COVID.

For those who think the old Big East or AAC would be a better fit for our non-revenue sports, I don’t really understand that argument. The current Big East (or even the American Conference) would still require lots of travel. The competition might be weaker making it easier for BC to compete, but we would probably be on a level playing field with those schools if we had Big East budgets instead of ACC budgets. Also, all those sports are less stable outside of the ACC, so you would never know when one of your peer programs would face cuts.

If football is important to you as a BC fan, than the current ACC was always our best home. We are in the only Power 5 conference with more than two private schools. We are aligned with schools that share our values, problems and challenges. While we have not broken through to become a power program within the ACC, I still believe it can happen. It will take the right coaches, incredible fundraising and improved fan support. Look at the difference in Clemson in one decade. BC can have that sort of breakthrough. The first step is to ignore the people whining about the old Big East.

Why Pat Kraft makes sense

BC hired Temple Athletic Director Patrick Kraft as its new AD. Although the media floated Kraft early, the process was quiet. A discreet search is BC’s preference under normal circumstance. Running a search during Corona and national civil unrest allowed the whole process to fly under the radar even more so. The fact that this hire was so matter of fact and predictable might be just what BC needs. The school is trying to replace a shooting star in Jarmond and facing incredible uncertainty with the future of college sports and the future of the college model itself. A low risk, solid hire is probably the right move. And Kraft’s track record only speaks to what BC needs and should emphasize in the coming years.

He is a football guy. If it wasn’t clear before COVID, it is certainly clear now that College Football is the only sport that truly matters in college athletic. The sports is critical to the operations, fundraising and marketing of any school playing in a Power 5 conference. (If that is a even healthy is another discussion entirely.) BC has a new coach that needs the full support of the Athletic Department. He needs an AD who can get him every resource he needs, fight every political battle in the conference and at the school, and work with him on everything from scheduling to recruiting. Kraft -- a former Big Ten Football player -- has hands on experience and success doing just that at Temple. Temple’s ability to get better under Matt Rhule and then maintain that success under successive coaches is a great sign. Few ADs have done that anywhere.

He is a fundraiser. We are in the middle of an Athletic Department capital campaign. It will be up to Kraft to help BC exceed its goal and then work to determine how the funds will be allocated. One of the things that Jarmond understood and embraced was the need for the AD to be the face of the program to donors and to be aggressive with the asks. Sales and relationships are a huge portion of the job. Given his track record and what others are sharing, it seems Kraft understands this. His short stint at Loyola Chicago should also give him some insight into raising money at a private Jesuit school versus a big state school.

He needs to fix basketball. BC Basketball is an embarrassment. Everyone has an opinion on why or how we got here, but we can all agree the last decade has been a waste and it is time to fix it. The only person who might not realize how pathetic it has been might be Father Leahy. Although he is a football guy, Kraft is an Indiana grad and worked at Loyola Chicago and Temple. All of those places are “basketball schools.” He understands the importance of basketball and how it can drive plenty of the attention and goodwill that football brings. A change was coming before the sports world got turned upside down. Kraft brings a new set of eyes, a fresh start, no attachment to Jim Christian. He is a new voice to tell Father Leahy: “this needs to be fixed.”

Using an Executive Search firm is not a big deal

BC engaged Collegiate Sports Associates' founder Todd Turner to run the Executive Search for our new Athletic Director. This sparked some indignation from some BC fans. Most were upset at the notion that the firm that employs Brad Bates is involved, but others view the whole exercise as a waste of money. I think the whole kerfuffle is silly.

1. COVID-19 makes a search that much harder and an Executive Search firm fills in some gaps. These firms can do a lot of the due diligence on candidates that BC doesn't have the time or resources to perform under current circumstances. Because of travel challenges and budget issues, BC can't do a private jet tour meeting all the potential folks interested in the job. The candidate pool will have to be funneled down via calls/zooms and past relationships. That's what CSA/Turner will do.

2. All the big College Sports Search firms are conflicted in one way or another. For better or worse, College Sports is a small, fraternal business. You don't want to work with a company that employs Brad Bates? Fine, the next in line is one that employs Gene DeFilippo. Or maybe we should use the one that UCLA just used to hire away our AD! Or the one that gave us an AD who left after three years. There is no ideal. But Turner has lots of ACC connections and Bates can add background to the BC position that not many can.

3. This is different from the football search. Jarmond proudly replaced Addazio without using a search firm. It was a shroud move. However, it was a different circumstance from this search. Jarmond had a long time to research candidates before the season even began. Plus he was looking from a much more narrow pool of eligible candidates. Father Leahy and the Board shouldn't be expected to know all the mid-level ADs around the country or people from the sports or business world who might be a good fit. There are hundreds of potential candidates. Jarmond only had to research a few dozen and even then probably had four or five that he really liked.

4. The money is not wasteful. I don't know the specifics of the Turner deal, but assume at a minimum that BC will be paying over six figures for their services. It is likely much higher than that. But given the Athletic Department money at stake, this is not a waste. The new AD will have to make the call on millions of dollars of spending (and likely spending cuts). He or she will be critical to the University's future marketing and growth plan. The money spent on the search can be justified, especially if it is done in a professional manner.

5. BC makes the final decision, not the search firm. There is a perception that Brad Bates used a search firm for the Jim Christian search and that the firm basically picked BC's coach. You can debate if that is a fair recollection, but I don't think it would ever apply to anything Father Leahy signs off on. Whoever Turner identifies as the ideal candidate, it won't just be rubber stamped by Leahy. That's just not the way he has worked with our last AD searches. So don't worry about the firms influence. This will be Leahy and the Board's call.

Hiring in general is a bit of a crap shoot. If the search firm improves your odds that much more, it is worth it. BC fans should not focus on the firm. They should focus on who we hire.

The early names floated as Jarmond replacements

Martin Jarmond is now officially gone, so the BC side of the question is “who is next?”

BC is expected to name Vaughn Williams the interim. Williams was a long-time assistant AD under GDF and returned under Jarmond. He will probably be a candidate for the job full-time, but I would be surprised if any internal candidate got the job.

Based on speculation and gossip, I think Father Leahy and the Board still understand the importance of the role. While Jarmond’s time at BC was short, he validated their decision to focus on fundraising and being the face of the Athletic Department. In the midst of a Athletic Department Fund Raising Campaign and the most economically uncertain time in the last 50 years of college sports, I think they will still remain focused on someone who can be the face of the program and get people to open their wallets. These are some of the names already being floated. A few things to remember:

1. Jarmond was not one of the early names leaked last time, so it is very possible our future Athletic Director is unknown to all of us. 
2. BC has a history of over-correcting on a hire based on the previous hire's flaws. Gene was a bit dictatorial and had rubbed key people the wrong way, so they go with Brad Bates, who was not a big personality and was deferential. Bates was bland and a drag on fundraising, so they bring in a high-energy sales guy like Jarmond. The knock on Jarmond is that he wasn’t here for the long run, so it wouldn’t surprise me to see them hire someone who wants to be at BC a long time.

Vicky Chun, AD at Yale
Pros: Very experienced Athletic Director and fundraiser at private schools.
Cons: No experience at Power 5 programs.
Bottom Line: The Jarmond process showed that BC wanted to look beyond the traditional candidate pool. Don’t be surprised if they do it again by looking beyond the “boys club.”

Matt Hasselbeck, ESPN
Pros: Passionate about the job and the institution. Has the ability to be the face of the program yet is more than just a "rah rah" guy. He can switch hats to evaluate coaches and deal with the financials.
Cons: Zero experience.
Bottom Line: Matt’s supposed strong interest is intriguing. The timing is also intriguing as he was asked to help Jarmond during the Hafley process because Jarmond had rubbed a few influential people the wrong way. I don’t know why Hasselbeck would walk away from ESPN, but this is supposedly the one opportunity that would do it. I always liked him, but think the politics of this process will kill his candidacy.

Mark Jackson, AD at Villanova
Pros: From Boston, so this would/could be a final stop. Has been a big fundraiser and understands the importance of basketball. Also worked for Raiders, Patriots and USC, so he knows football.
Cons: You could claim he was in the right place at the right time for Villanova. USC, which knew him well, passed on him when they had their opening.
Bottom Line: He checks nearly every box you would want in a BC Athletic Director, but the obvious choice never seems to survive this process.

Graham Neff, Deputy AD at Clemson
Pros: CFO and business head of the biggest cash cow in the ACC. Deep ACC ties. Understands the financial implications ahead as well as anyone.
Cons: No history fundraising at a private school. Never made a coaching hire.
Bottom Line: He will probably be a P5 AD within five years and does keep BC firmly tied to the ACC decision makers, but he is still very young and has no ties to BC or any school like BC.

Zac Selmon, Sr Associate AD at Oklahoma
Pros: Like Jarmond, he is a young fundraiser from a football power. Has deep ties to the ACC (played at Wake, worked at UNC).
Cons: Has never made a coaching hire.
Bottom Line: His profile and career trajectory is close enough to Jarmond's that you can understand BC’s interest. But as I wrote, we tend to over-correct on hires, so I would be surprised if we hired Jarmond 2.0.

Thank you, Martin Jarmond

Per multiple reports Martin Jarmond is leaving BC to be the next Athletic Director of UCLA. I wish him nothing but the best of luck. While his time at BC was relatively short, he installed an enthusiasm and optimism missing for nearly a decade. He didn't reshape the department but did make some critical decisions, most notably firing Addazio and hiring Hafley.

There are plenty of people who feel he is leaving too soon or are disappointed he didn't do more. My response is that it is hard to do a lot in three years in a big bureaucratic position where embracing the status quo is needed so often just to get through a respective season. BC is a political place and he managed the politics better than Brad Bates and better than the latter half of the DeFilippo era. As for leaving, how can anyone be surprised? When you hire a young, ambitious person, he or she is going to want to move onto the next challenge.

BC is in a better place than it was and finding his replacement won't be hard. Ever to excel and good luck to Martin.

Why I am not worried about Don Brown's raid of Massachusetts recruiting

When Don Brown left BC for Michigan, I considered it a loss. After suffering through the growing pains as we transitioned from Spaz's zone heavy conservative D, to Brown's aggressive blitzing scheme, we finally had an elite unit. Brown also did a great job of identifying defensive backs who would thrive in his system. The Defense hasn't been the same since he left. I thought he would have success at Michigan (and he has, for the most part) and expected him to thrive with higher profile recruits in his system. Yet due to comfort or trusting his own eyes and network, he has continued to heavily recruiting New England and Massachusetts. This year he is really going hard after Massachusetts kids and has flipped some BC verbals and is targeting other potential BC kids. While this should be worrisome, I am not really concerned. There are a couple of different issues, but in the end I think it is a mistake for Michigan and maybe BC is dodging a bullet.

The factors (BC-centered first)

1. I trust Hafley's recruiting and talent evaluations. Hafley had offers to these local kids, so he and his staff thought enough of them that they should be part of the program. Losing a recruiting battle sucks, but it is to be a bit expected when Hafley is a new head coach. He doesn't have the local connections or trust Brown has yet. It will take time, but Hafley has shown that he can find talent anywhere. He has done it at every stop. Even if his first two classes are light on local recruits, I am sure that in the end, he will fill the roster with players as good as the ones committing to Michigan now.

2. The development timeline and environment are very different at the two schools. BC probably plays up the "diamond in the rough" recruiting narrative too much, but it is based on some truths. We have a history of finding late bloomers, tweeners and guys with chips on their shoulders who blossom at the Heights. That is often because given the lower expectations around the program and around the recruiting ratings, we can take the time to develop these players. If they can play as freshmen, great. But we also don't wash them out if they can't like many of the top factories. That probably hurts BC's depth, but once a player has been around the block at BC, you often see a huge leap in performance and Football IQ. I don't have the same familiarity with Michigan's development process, but it seems like it is much more sink or swim. While a low-level three star might surprise in Day 1 at a big program like Michigan, more likely he will be lost or a step behind. Given their needs and the desire to knock off Ohio State, Michigan is probably best to get as many full developed stars as possible and let the best of the best play from Day 1.

3. I don't think Massachusetts talent justifies Michigan's investment. I have been hoping for a Massachusetts boom in football talent for two decades now. I thought the Patriots' success would create a whole new crop of football loving kids in our backyard. It hasn't. The grassroots level still pale in comparison to what you find in Ohio, New Jersey and even Michigan. There are not enough kids, not enough dedicated time to football, not enough good lower level coaching and not enough competition to make these youths better. Are there still good football players locally? Yes. But not enough to fill BC's class, and certainly not enough to fill 20% of Michigan's annual recruiting class. Just take a look at the number of players from the Bay State who have gone to Power 5 schools since 2013 (when Brown came in with Addazio).

2020 -- 11 Massachusetts commitments to P5 programs (3 to Michigan, 2 to BC)
2019 -- 5 Massachusetts commitments to P5 programs (1 to Michigan, 1 to BC)
2018 -- 7 Massachusetts commitments to P5 programs (0 to Michigan, 4 to BC)
2017 -- 9 Massachusetts commitments to P5 programs (0 to Michigan, 4 to BC)
2016 -- 7 Massachusetts commitments to P5 programs (1 to Michigan, 3 to BC)
2015 -- 13 Massachusetts commitments to P5 programs (0 to Michigan, 7 to BC)
2014 -- 10 Massachusetts commitments to P5 programs (0 to Michigan 8 to BC)
2013 -- 7 Massachusetts commitments to P5 programs (1 to Michigan, 2 to BC)

Addazio, for all his faults, had a good eye for talent and loved New England kids. If there had been more local talent, he would have recruited it. And how many kids in the last decade have truly slipped under the radar? It is not like Mass kids are filling up and staring at lower level FBS programs. When considering the negligible success that many of the Mass P5 kids that "got away" from BC, I think we know that there is not some sort of untapped goldmine locally.

4. Who is not recruiting these kids. BC offers local talent in its backyard. That makes sense. Don Brown leads a push by Michigan for these same kids. As we outlined, I would expect him to aim higher, but still makes sense. Ryan Day (and Al Washington) and Steve Addazio know these schools, know these coaches and probably know many of these players. They are not bothering recruiting them. That should tell Michigan all it needs to know.

Waiting for the "right time" is usually a bad idea

Jim Christian is not being fired by BC.

A year ago, BC and Martin Jarmond had every reason in the world to make a change with Men's Basketball. But they waited. The idea was to get the house in order (financially, facilities, and really take time making a thoughtful hire). Then this year -- despite some fun moments -- predictably proved to be another disappointment and another wasted year. They wasted the players' time, the fans' time and even Jim Christian's time. (Coaching is tough under the best of circumstances. Coaching is really tough when there isn't buy-in from the bosses, players and fans.)

Now, when BC was on the verge of finally making a move, the whole world got flipped on its head. BC has huge questions with no answers with regards to their 2020-21 school year, their budget shortfalls this year (housing refunds), the hit the endowment took, and the potential huge loss of revenues next year from media partners if Football is not played. Adding a basketball coaching search to that mix was not financially or perhaps even logistically possible. So they kicked the metaphorical can...again.

Basketball clearly isn't that important. Yet BC Men will be play again. And when they do, Jim Christian will be coaching. That season will have little fan support. It will be tough to recruit and whatever media attention BC gets will constantly be about Jim Christian's future. It will be a lame duck season and once again, a waste of time.

Now if Jon Beilein was really interested would BC have made a move? Probably, but he wasn't. BC's facilities and current spot on the basketball landscape were the biggest obstacles.

My frustration is consistent. When you know you have the wrong guy, you need to make a change. The move should have been made last year. And even with all the current economic uncertainty, I would argue a less expensive hire now (Coen, Becker) would be better than another year of Jim Christian.

The only solace in this all is that the other major conference schools who were on the verge of change -- Minnesota, Texas, Wake Forest, etc -- also have put hiring and firing on pause. We won't miss out on "the guy," whoever that might have been.

I hope BC plays all sports next year. I hope Christian gets a great season out of his young talent. I hope things get back to normal and things like a silly basketball coaching search can feel important again. I also hope the next BC coach is the right guy, because Jim Christian is not.

Jim Christian is not THE problem, but he is A problem

With another blowout loss, the TV crew working the Notre Dame game shifted the conversation to Jim Christian's future at BC. Predictably they mentioned that Christian is a nice guy and respected by all. That's a good thing. They hammered BC's facilities and unwillingness to play the arms race in college sports. That is a fair criticism and needs to be addressed. But regardless of BC Basketball's many issues and challenges, six seasons has shown that Jim Christian is not the guy to fix them nor overcome them.

I don't take firing a coach lightly. I understand he has a family and a staff that will all be impacted by this. However, this is one of the challenges of their chosen profession and they are all well compensated for the risk they assume. The ones who are not compensated are they players. I don't know if they are not that talented, checked out or what, but they didn't look like a well-coached team for most of this year. Effort issues. Defensive issues. Not making good decisions. All of that has little to do with basketball facilities or admissions offices. I understand injuries and age are factors with the roster, but the most consistent thing about the JC era is not maximizing talent. Was there any year where you felt he got the most out of his roster (maybe his first season?).

I had an argument with a BC person last year and said that even if he had Top 4 facilities and budget in the ACC, I don't think Christian would get Top 4 results. I still believe that.

Every coaching change has risk. We might lose talent. We might not find the right coach and waste another couple years. I don't know. But I know what we are doing is not working and it is time to make a coaching change. We've seen what a new Women's Basketball coach can do. Why not roll the dice on the Men's side?

Why the same old names are unlikely hires

I don't know if BC will fire Jim Christian. I think they should, but the point of these coaching profiles is "where does BC go from here?" and "who is the right guy for the program?" Part 4: Last year's candidates.


Last year when it looked like Jim Christian might be fired, you saw multiple names floated, but three that seemed rather relevant and obvious were Northeastern coach Bill Coen, St. Bonaventure coach Mark Schmidt and former Ohio State coach Thad Matta. As speculation kicks in on the BC job again, all three are being floated again. This is in part because the ties to BC (Coen and Schmidt) or Jarmond (Matta) are so obvious. However, I don't think any of these guys will be on Jarmond's short list. If he wanted to hire them, he could have done so a year ago.

Because of their ties to BC, Martin Jarmond heard "Schmidt" and "Coen" a lot last year. They've been long-time head coaches, so they have an established track record. BC and Jarmond would know what they are getting and know what the potential obstacles would be (mainly recruiting at an ACC level). And more importantly, money and availability wouldn't have been an issue with either last year. But Jarmond didn't pull the trigger. Partially to get other things in place at BC and also -- whether fair or not --  the perception that neither was a difference maker. Last year at this time both were near the top of their respective conferences. While still having winning seasons this year, both teams have taken a slight step back, which only reinforces that they are pretty good coaches, but not great.

Matta is a bit more complicated. Like the other two, he was there for the taking last year. But it didn't happen. Who knows if there was serious interest then...or now? As I said last year, Matta had the Georgia job until he slept on it and decided he didn't want to come back. If you read up on him, he says he is happier than ever, but his health remains a concern. Jarmond worked with Matta for a long time, so he probably has a good feel for what the coach can or cannot do at this stage of his career. My guess is that more time away from the action and grind of the game doesn't make BC more appealing to Matta nor for Jarmond to bet his basketball program on a guy whose heart might not be in it.

Can Tommy Lloyd build the Gonzaga model at BC?

I don't know if BC will fire Jim Christian. I think they should, but the point of these coaching profiles is "where does BC go from here?" and "who is the right guy for the program?" Part 3: Tommy Lloyd.

BC Basketball doesn't have an identity. Or at least doesn't have a positive identity. Meanwhile there is a Jesuit school on the other side of the country in Gonzaga that has gone from cute mid-major to a perennial power with a very disciplined and specific model. It is heavy on analytics and heavy on international recruiting. And the lead guy on international recruiting is Tommy Lloyd.

We all know BC's challenges with elite recruits. Our facilities are inferior. Our admissions office can be meddlesome. It doesn't appear like we are buying the top talent like most of the traditional powers are (per FBI recordings). That leaves BC to keep trying to find the under the radar guys. Gonzaga also has unconventional recruiting in that their focus is primarily international players. They are doing this by finding them early, developing relationships and then making them better once they get to Spokane. BC has had a handful of international players with limited success, but there is no reason why this wouldn't work in Boston or in the ACC. (There is also the added bonus of most of these internationals are students who the BC admissions office will approve.)

Few is quick to credit Lloyd for the talent. It is also assumed that Lloyd will take over if and when Few decides to retire. But how long will Lloyd wait? As Mike Hopkins showed at Syracuse, even the most loyal and patient assistants still want their shot.

I think Lloyd could quickly upgrade the talent at BC. But like Eisley, the huge unknown is can he actually coach. He has interviewed for other jobs, so we know he will listen. But those other opportunities were all west coast. Would he be willing to take a risk across the country in the toughest basketball conference?

Lloyd has a lot of similarities to Jeff Hafley in that he's done everything you would want but be a head coach. I don't know think he will be the first call, but I do think Jarmond understands the Gonzaga model and knows it is an option for BC.

Would Bobby Hurley fit at BC?

I don't know if BC will fire Jim Christian. I think they should, but the point of these coaching profiles is "where does BC go from here?" and "who is the right guy for the program?" Part 2: Bobby Hurley.

When a successful coach -- especially one at a Power Conference job -- gets floated for multiple openings, you know his agent is putting his name out there. Arizona State's Bobby Hurley has been linked to rumored openings, including a potential spot at BC. While this sort of coaching carousel gossip is often a ploy for more money from their current job, it also means that Hurley is open to a move.

Although he is having his best season yet at Arizona State, you can see why Hurley might want a move. 1. The Pac-12 is in an unstable situation and continues to lag behind the other conferences with regards to money. While BC might not spend right now, we could probably top Hurley's $2.6 million salary. 2. Hurley is an East Coast guy who played in the ACC. If he wants back, BC would make sense. 3. Hurley might be wearing out his welcome with some. Just last week he got into a verbal spat with UCLA fans. And if you've ever watched Arizona State game, you would know that Hurley is very vocal, very animated and a big personality.

It is Hurley's personality that has me questioning if BC would even bother with him. You can tell from Jarmond's recent hires that he values a coach who can represent BC in a warm, professional manner. Hurley is not afraid to be the face of the program, but would his big personality cause political problems for Jarmond and BC? There were plenty who didn't care for Addazio's antics on the sidelines or behind the scenes. Would Hurley's histrionics bug the same people?

Then there is one other problem -- Hurley has a $6+ million buyout at Arizona State. Those can always been negotiated but that might make Hurley more expensive than even Beilein. I don't care for Hurley, but I think he would win and probably win big at BC. He has an intensity that BC Basketball hasn't seen since Gary Williams. That sort of passion would be welcome to BC fans and I think among the local basketball community. Among the "A" List guys, I think Hurley is the longest shot, but BC needs to at least make the call to see if his interest in coming back East is real.

Let's talk about Howard Eisley

I don't know if BC will fire Jim Christian. I think they should, but the point of these coaching profiles is "where does BC go from here?" and "who is the right guy for the program?" Part 1: Howard Eisley.

There is only one major conference program that would hire Howard Eisley as their Head Coach this season and that's Boston College. That is both a problem and an opportunity.

No one else will hire Eisley this year for some simple reasons like he has only been a college assistant one season, has no head coaching experience at any level and is rather anonymous to the media and casual fans.

BC would hire Eisley because he is a well-regarded alumni from a very successful era of BC Basketball, he would be something different after giving the job to a series of mid-major coaches, and he is respected among basketball people. It doesn't hurt that his son is a highly touted 8th-grader, so he is familiar with the AAU circuit, process and network, which would help in recruiting.

If anything, the model for hiring Eisley would be his current boss at Michigan, Juwan Howard. Howard had no prior head coaching experience and no prior recruiting experience. There are some notably differences too. Howard took over a much more stable situation at Michigan and was a more accomplished assistant in the NBA (Howard was known as Miami's big man coach and defensive expert). Howard's higher profile in the sport and among Michigan fans made the transition less controversial.

Eisley is not the way I would go now. Like any blank slate, he has great potential. But the program is in such a delicate spot, I would hate to see it continue to stumble. If we were to go the Eisley route, he would have to emulate one of Juwan Howard's critical steps -- bringing along an experienced head coach (Howard hired Phil Martelli). I don't know who that guy would be for Eisley, but that right hand man who has been through the process is invaluable.

Will Eisley get the job? He doesn't fit the model of other coaches hired by Jarmond, but I assume he will be interviewed. If he emerges as a real candidate, I will dive deeper into what BC Basketball would look like under Eisley.

The underlying importance of the John Beilein talk

Numerous reports this week have stated that the Cleveland Cavaliers and John Beilein are working on an exit agreement. It sounds like he is quitting but also getting paid, so maybe it is more mutual than the initial "Beilein is walking away" speculation. Regardless of how it happens, the minute Beilein is free, he instantly becomes the biggest free agent in college basketball. And with his name looming comes the media list of landing spots including Texas, Indiana, Minnesota, Wake and...Boston College. Now anyone reading this probably already thinks Beilein to BC will never happen. It doesn't matter if he would consider BC or laugh it off. What matters is two fold:

1. The College Hoops media (and agents feeding them gossip) assume the BC job is coming open.

2. Outside of Texas, there are fewer great jobs certainly opening. This would be a good time for BC to make a hire since we won't be competing for our candidate with many other power programs.

I find this encouraging. I remain firmly in the fire Jim Christian camp. Even if he has a strong finish (for him) to this season, I think we've seen his best and should move on after six years. Regardless of John Beilein's availability, change is needed.  

Could Beilein end up at BC? Sure. Stranger things have happened. He graduated from a Jesuit college. He supposedly prefers a program focused on development and teaching and not recruiting one and dones. BC offers access to a major conference, a decent returning roster and plenty of patience. The expectations are much lower than a Texas. If the 67 year old guy just wants to coach again, BC offers him a chance to do it away from the spotlight yet with access to media and the NCAA tournament.

Beilein doesn't fit the mold of the other hires Jarmond has made, but getting this type of coach might make him adjust. I don't know if money will be an issue. The current rumor is Beilein will get $12 million from Cleveland, so a big pay day from BC might not be needed.

There is also a chance that Beilein is done. The man is 67, left one of the best situations in his sport at Michigan and clearly wasn't enjoying coaching in the NBA. Maybe this is it.  But the fact that BC is even being connected to him is good news for frustrated BC basketball fans.

It is not about one game

BC hung with Duke for 35 minutes and then let it slip away late. What was frustrating and tantalizing during the back and forth is that Conte was rocking and the team was getting by without playing their "A" game. But we are well past the "it was close" stage of the Jim Christian era.

I didn't post during basketball's most recent win streak. There were good games and good moments. Beating UVA and UNC -- even when they are down -- is still worth noting. I am glad for the progress, but it is not enough. When evaluating where we are and where were are going, I look at the entirety of the JC era.

I like the wins and root for the team, but I am not going to backslide on my stance. I hope BC finishes strong. I also hope that like in Football, a strong finish doesn't change the ultimate decision.

Reaction to the 2020 Schedule

The ACC finally released their football schedules Wednesday. Here is BC's:

9/4 -- Syracuse (Friday game)
9/12 -- Ohio
9/19 -- at Kansas
9/26 -- Purdue
10/2 -- Clemson (Friday game)
10/10 -- Louisville
10/22 -- at Virginia Tech (Thursday game)
10/31 -- Holy Cross
11/7 -- at NC State
11/14 -- at Florida State
11/21 -- North Carolina
11/28 -- at Wake Forest

While we knew the opponents prior to Wednesday, the dates and days of the schedule were not known. I would say the fan reaction was mixed. I really liked the set up, but I am not a season ticket holder, so some of the quirks don't impact me. Here are my thoughts:

Things I like:
-- I like starting the season against Syracuse on a Friday during a holiday weekend. While it might hurt attendance a bit, we should get a decent TV slot. I also think starting with a conference game is a great tool to motivate and focus the team throughout the offseason.
-- Thursday night football is not what it once was due to the NFL taking the night as their own. But it is still a spotlight timeslot and we have a long history of playing Virginia Tech on Thursday nights.
-- I am glad they moved the Holy Cross game. Usually we play our FCS opponents earlier in the season. With this being Hafley's first year, I think placing a easy game late in the year will offer him and the team a chance to reboot and reset, especially if things have been rocky.
-- I like avoiding a Thanksgiving weekend home game. There are numerous reasons why it doesn't work. I know BC can't avoid it every year, but any time you can it is god news.

Things I dislike:
-- Three non-Saturday game days. With my personal schedule it actually helps, but in my opinion BC gives up too much in this scenario. Saturday remains the anchor of the college football world. While there are advantages to the occasional odd game, it will always be better to play on a Saturday (for fans and players). TV drives this, but BC needs to put up more of a fight.
-- Lack of November home games. Games in September are great for weather and fans. But we give up any home field advantage the cold New England weather might bring. I also think spreading the games out a bit makes it easier on your season ticket holders.

How is this not a coaching issue?

Basketball got walloped in the Carrier Dome by Syracuse Wednesday night. The Jim Christian apologists were a little more subdued, but how can anyone not put this on the coaching staff? Every argument leads that way...

1. The talent is young and raw...debatable, but it is the staff's job to shape them and cover up their deficiencies.

2. The talent is not doing what the staff is implementing...then this is a problem and the coaching staff is failing to get them to either buy in or understand what they need to do.

3. The talent is not good...who recruited them?

Now there are other defenses of Christian not specifically related to this game.

1. There are institutional issues with BC Basketball that no one could overcome...I think BC Basketball needs more institutional support, but the severity of the job's handicap is debatable. Could another coach overcome BC's issues? Who knows. But we do know one coach who can't.

2. A change is not worth destabilizing recruiting...In my opinion it is worth the risk. The right new coach has a shot at holding the recruits, plus Christian has shown the best he can do with elite talent is an early exit from the NIT.

Hafley wins...so does LSU

It would have been nice for BC and the ACC if Clemson had won the National Championship but LSU pulled away in a long and disappointing game. For BC fans the real story of the game was Jeff Hafley's work in ESPN's Coaches' Film Room. Our new coach shined.

Despite being the junior guy in the room, Hafley showed no fear and talked shop throughout. He was very knowledgeable without being geeky or coming off like a know it all. He slipped in a little humor and understood when to defer to his peers. For a new guy and someone who hasn't done much TV, he was a natural.

As much as I would like to say these skills translate into winning football, remember that his predecessor was good in the Film Room too. But Hafley was very different from Addazio. Where Addazio came off as booming and liked to talk about the trenches, Hafley showed a little more depth and a lot more nuance. He will be a welcome change.

Congrats to the Coach. Hopefully he will be in this game one day and other coaches will be talking about him.