New assistant coach

[Bobby Metzinger]

Have to remember that Doug Woolard was the AD in charge of this alleged "national search" for Soderberg.

Woolard is perhaps the worst AD in the history of the trade. He really turned that South Florida program around in the OBE. (Old Big East, not Order of the British Empire).

[Clock_Tower]

I think the love affair with assistant coaches stems from having Majerus as coach and knowing that it was only a matter of time before he retired due to failing health (although I'm not sure many anticipated it playing out the way it did). Now we have another older coach and we are still wondering who the successor will be. I'm not saying it is right or you shouldn't complain about it. I'm just explaining the mindset.

I agree with milwaukeebill that the most successful programs that are similar to ours seem to thrive by hiring from within (see Xavier, Butler, Gonzaga). I think the issue with SLU hiring from within seems to be that the administration is too cheap to pony up some decent cash to keep good assistants around. Therefore, we lose good assistants after a year or two rather than grooming them as potential head coaches down the road (see Harriman). I've even heard some chatter about Cheaney already that he is a good hire and will help, but won't be at SLU long before he moves on to a bigger job. I'm hopeful that if he is as great as everyone is saying then the administration will do what it takes to keep him around if another school needing an assistant wants to pry him away.

You're probably right. But keep in mind that while Majerus was a wonderful coach, while I am so glad he was here, while I am so glad he changed the culture at SLU and while I truly hope we finally get a President who fully supports the athletic programs - especially men's basketball, the coaching "tree" of Majerus is not that great. IMO, and based really on by my personal observations of him since he was hired here at SLU, he brought in assistant coaches who already possessed skills and qualities which helped RM now -- not so much in building or creating a legacy for the future. For instance, good/bad on Porter was that he could recruit but was not good with the x's and o's -- just look at the talent he assembled at Illinois State but then didn't win. Look at this game coaches for us when RM was absent. In short, RM didn't need another x's and o's guy -- RM was already the master. Instead, he needed a proven recruiter who knew the Missouri/Illinois territory really well -- and he not only got one in Porter but he also got a former D1 head coach. But just b/c Porter was very instrumental to RM rebuilding the program, was here a long time, was loyal and was a great guy/personality does not mean that Porter would do well as RM's successor. In short, Porter failed at Illinois State as head coach despite bringing in as good or better talent than the other Valley schools and therefore I see no reason why Porter would be some great head coach for SLU -- especially without a history of winning and with Fr. Biondi at the helm. Same with Whitesell who failed at Chicago Loyola -- RM essentially swapped Porter for Whitesell and, ironically, so did Chicago Loyola. Again, an older re-tread coach is not the recipe for success in promoting from within. And while not an RM hire, Jim Platt would be the same. Angres Thorpe could also be put into this category.

As to Brad Soderberg, yes he was here only 1 year, but he also was younger, former D1 top assistant at a successful D1 school, with even former head coaching experience at the D2 level, and therefore fit the profile of a medium level program such as SLU hiring an up-and-coming hotshot D1 assistant from a BCS conference school. Was it a going on the cheap hire? Yes. Did it turn out poorly. Yes.

As to Jensen and Harriman, both had the potential to be groomed to be the next head coach. At the same time, both came to SLU with really no coaching experience at all, both did well here for us but both left too early (in my opinion) to have sufficiently developed and been considered legitimate head coaching material. Again, this is where our only real chances of developing an assistant coach into a head turns is cut short due to SLU's refusal to pay them enough to stay during their development. And as to Calbert Chaney, at least he was already someone else's DBO rather taking such beginning position initially with SLU.

Will SLU eventually develop their own successor head coaches? Possibly - if SLU is able to sustain a higher level of success, hire younger guys (not former D1 coaches who have failed or long-time assistants like Jim Platt) and pay them enough to get them to stay.

[NextYearBill]

our new hire is the top story on ESPN Men's basketball headlines, fwiw

[majerus mojo]

our new hire is the top story on ESPN Men's basketball headlines, fwiw

AP article: http://m.espn.go.com/ncb/story?storyId=9589362&src=desktop

"Cheaney was a sophomore in high school when Crews said he first met him, and he joins a school that's 54-16 the last two seasons."

54-16 eh... not too shabby. 88-20 will look even cooler after three seasons.

[Deutschkind]

our new hire is the top story on ESPN Men's basketball headlines, fwiw

Interesting comments below the story:

"Probably a good move. Crews' stay at SLU will be short-lived due to his success. Cheaney could be head coach in a year."

"You are probably right. Crews is a good coach but he is a Bobby Knight disciple and can be really tough on his players. As soft as kids have gotten in this era, that type of coaching doesn't seem to last a long time."

Maybe the entitled kids at large state school have gotten soft, but we'll just keep bringing in those who aren't lazy.

[JMM28]

Interesting comments below the story:

"Probably a good move. Crews' stay at SLU will be short-lived due to his success. Cheaney could be head coach in a year."

"You are probably right. Crews is a good coach but he is a Bobby Knight disciple and can be really tough on his players. As soft as kids have gotten in this era, that type of coaching doesn't seem to last a long time."

Maybe the entitled kids at large state school have gotten soft, but we'll just keep bringing in those who aren't lazy.

That is what is known as "out of town stupid."

[Taj79]

Who said SLU is a graveyard for coaches? To use the VW ad line "this guy." Yeah, me. Where do we get off even considering our alma mater as having produced anyone worth any salt on the collegiate scene? Romar went to Washington. Bennett went to St. Mary's. Dollar to wherever he is. I don't count them though because they are all off the Romar tree and that is the UCLA/Pepperdine tree and not Saint Louis University. Again -- Albrecht, Coleman, Ekker, Grawer, Spoon, Soderberg, and Majerus. Nobody really moved onward and upward. I can't think of one assistant that moved upward short of Moser. Harriman's story is still not done. Neither is Jensen's. But as pointed out above by clock, Majerus wasn't exactly a roots and branches kind of coaching tree guy. He brought in guys for his here and now. Crews is off the Bobby Knight tree, not the Rick Majerus tree. He did Rick a one year favor and the chips fell where they did.

I had hoped Rick was going to start the sustainability thing but clock hits it on the head where he says Rick brought in skills that helped him now. Once this resurrection job was done, he could ride off again into the sunset with his HOF rep intact and claims of rectifying a sinking program resonating louder than before. I would have hoped he cared about what he left behind but that's a moot point now.

Cheaney is a nice addition and while I don't pretend to know the formula for success, I like the move. Only time will let it play out to whatever its conclusion will be.

[Iggy]

"Cheaney was a sophomore in high school when Crews said he first met him, and he joins a school that's 54-16 the last two seasons."

Does that include Rockhurst?

[JMM28]

Well technically then Jim Crews is off the Tates Locke tree...

[ACE]

Who said SLU is a graveyard for coaches? To use the VW ad line "this guy." Yeah, me. Where do we get off even considering our alma mater as having produced anyone worth any salt on the collegiate scene? Romar went to Washington. Bennett went to St. Mary's. Dollar to wherever he is. I don't count them though because they are all off the Romar tree and that is the UCLA/Pepperdine tree and not Saint Louis University. Again -- Albrecht, Coleman, Ekker, Grawer, Spoon, Soderberg, and Majerus. Nobody really moved onward and upward. I can't think of one assistant that moved upward short of Moser. Harriman's story is still not done. Neither is Jensen's. But as pointed out above by clock, Majerus wasn't exactly a roots and branches kind of coaching tree guy. He brought in guys for his here and now. Crews is off the Bobby Knight tree, not the Rick Majerus tree. He did Rick a one year favor and the chips fell where they did.

I had hoped Rick was going to start the sustainability thing but clock hits it on the head where he says Rick brought in skills that helped him now. Once this resurrection job was done, he could ride off again into the sunset with his HOF rep intact and claims of rectifying a sinking program resonating louder than before. I would have hoped he cared about what he left behind but that's a moot point now.

Cheaney is a nice addition and while I don't pretend to know the formula for success, I like the move. Only time will let it play out to whatever its conclusion will be.

I don't get that point at all. Majerus left a staff that included two former head coaches, one (Crews) went on to become national coach of the year. He reportedly even helped pay for Crews' salary out of his own pocket. We should be thankful he did. For those who like young coaches, he left Tanner Bronson and got Mike Lepore from Wake. And if you are one that needs a former Billiken on staff, he even brought on Danny Brown. More importantly, what he left behind was a roster that just completed the most successful SLU season in the modern era (Top 20 finish). And again, this coming year a roster capable of leading SLU to their third straight NCAA Tourney appearance, something that has NEVER happened in the modern era. I think he left behind something pretty special. Now what Crews & Co. do with it is up to them.

[Clock_Tower]

I don't get that point at all. Majerus left a staff that included two former head coaches, one (Crews) went on to become national coach of the year. He reportedly even helped pay for Crews' salary out of his own pocket. We should be thankful he did. For those who like young coaches, he left Tanner Bronson and got Mike Lepore from Wake. And if you are one that needs a former Billiken on staff, he even brought on Danny Brown. More importantly, what he left behind was a roster that just completed the most successful SLU season in the modern era (Top 20 finish). And again, this coming year a roster capable of leading SLU to their third straight NCAA Tourney appearance, something that has NEVER happened in the modern era. I think he left behind something pretty special. Now what Crews & Co. do with it is up to them.

Ace.

No one is saying or implying that that RM left program in bad shape. Frankly, it is hard to imagine leaving a program in better shape than RM did. Of course, RM was not intending on leaving the program but in coaching what he had built and in rightfully enjoying what he built.

Instead, assembling a staff of older, experienced former D1 head coaches as your assistant coaches is awesome for the short term, filled gaps and left room/time for RM to focus on other areas (pretty smart for an aging guy in poor health) but not exactly the ideal blue print for the future - to leave, nurture and develop a coaching tree/branches. As it turns out, RM did not coach another 5 years and having Jim Crews on staff to step in was extremely fortunate -- finally we caught a break here at SLU!!

As to Harriman, possibly he could have been groomed for RM's replacement. And I could be wrong, but it sure seemed that RM gave an assistant position job to a young unknown guy with a thick Australian accent to help us land/keep Cody Ellis, Christian Salisich, Rob Loe and others in the short run (and possibly more - especially if Fr. Biondi didn't pull the financial plug on the team trip to Australia opting for Canada instead at the last minute), together with other financial constraints associated with recruiting kids from Australia/New Zealand as to using the assistant coaching job to plant and grow a normal coaching tree/branch.

As to Moser, he clearly didn't have much success at Illinois State despite landing some special talent there. If we can agree that failure at Illinois State against fellow Valley schools is not a good indication of future success at SLU in the A10, then I'd suggest that Porter greatly assisted RM by recruiting here in the States/Midwest and landing our first 2 recruiting classes which have largely carried our team these past 5 years. Again, immediate benefit of a talented recruiter instead of future coaching tree/branch.

As to Whitesell, see Moser above. While probably not a proven of a recruiter, he sure knew the Chicago area along with Illinois/Midwest.

As to Angres Thorpe, RM and SLU benefitted with continuity in keeping players like TL, KL, DB and others in the short term.

As to Jensen, RM cannot be blamed in that RM did bring him in w/o experience and then Jensen unexpectedly left just prior to the season. Cannot blame RM for that one. And, of course, Jensen may have had the most potential had he stayed even longer. Jensen is the type of guy who would have coaching tree branches -- young, smart, hard-working, American, good speaker, former player...

[majerus mojo]

Ace.

No one is saying or implying that that RM left program in bad shape. Frankly, it is hard to imagine leaving a program in better shape than RM did. Of course, RM was not intending on leaving the program but in coaching what he had built and in rightfully enjoying what he built.

Perfect. Just stop there. Harriman and Jensen are not walking through that door.

[kshoe]

Clock,

Did you bother reading the post that ace was responding to and highlighted? Taj basically said that RM left the program in bad shape and Ace pointed out the program wasn't in bad shape at all.

Not sure how your post could start with this:

No one is saying or implying Majerus left the program in bad shape.

That is exactly what taj did!

[Clock_Tower]

Clock,

Did you bother reading the post that ace was responding to and highlighted? Taj basically said that RM left the program in bad shape and Ace pointed out the program wasn't in bad shape at all.

Not sure how your post could start with this:

No one is saying or implying Majerus left the program in bad shape.

That is exactly what taj did!

Shoe. No, that's not what Taj did. I'll let Taj clarify what he meant on his own but I took Taj's comments to be limited to "sustainability" of a coaching tree as opposed to saying the program is not better off. Big difference. Reread yourself and let me know if you agree.

Only a fool would say we were better off prior to RM than now post RM.

Maybe that was part of RM's genius -- he not only assembled players who were better collectively than individually but he did the same with his coaching staffs. Maybe RM saw the weaknesses in himself and made up for it with his assistant coach hires. The fact that each of his assistant coaches may be very strong in some area but weak in other areas meant he had a very strong staff, collectively, with himself at the helm When no longer at the helm, his staff would fall apart because none were individually that strong. Wasn't that the case at Utah? Not the case with Jim Crews.

If correct, then shouldn't RM be praised for assembling the possible best staff (collectively) to win games under his tenure rather than blamed for not assembling a staff of the best three individual coaches (those who might be coaching tree pedigree) even though they may have duplicative skills in some areas and each might be lacking in other areas and thereby not be quite as a strong of coaching staff? Frankly, I don't think RM cared or should have cared about his successor. Instead, I believe he wanted to win and knew that with the strongest staff, collectively, the program would not only land that one extra player but also would coach/develop the team to make the necessary difference between winning and losing.

[thetorch]

I don't know why any coach would groom an obvious successor. Most coaches, especially if they are good, think they will coach forever. Even Majerus did that to some extent. I believe Rick was only concerned with winning the game in front of him, not winning games 5 years after he left. I have no problem with that.

I believe Assts have become way more important in the last 15-20 years. It took awhile for SLU to realize this. Some of Soderbergs staffs had more experience in selling used cars and insurance than coaching basketball.

We don't really know how much we pay our Assts only that it less than St. Johns. Does anyone have an idea of what Xavier, Gonzaga or Butler pays? Even historically? Those are the programs we attempting to emulate and they seem to have this coaching carousel thing down pat. Still barring unforeseen circumstances Crews is here at least 5 more years. No need to concern ourselves with his successor. With the way we go through assts, nobody on the staff may be here in 2 years much less 5.

[Taj79]

@kshoe ---- set the bias aside for once, will ya? My 277 word post uses the word "program" once. In the context/phrase Majerus could claim "rectifying a sinking program." How that is extrapolated into "taj basically said RM left the program in bad shape?" No candy coating this, your statement is assinine and only proves your reading comprehension on my posts is biased by your general dislike of anything I say.

Only an idiot would state the program now is in worse shape than when Majerus took over and short of your deeply personal and religious belief, I am not that stupid. What did someone say .. we could be some ridiculous 88 and 20 once this year is over counting the last three years total? What I said was in hindsight, I didn't see Majerus leaving us/SLU with an exit strategy. That's all. Maybe his startegy was either Harriman or Jensen, but both left. Given the b*tch he pitched about the Cavs stealing Jensen right before the season started, I was thinking it was Al. Crews was a one-year stop-gap. Whitesell? Platt? Meh. Bronson? Maybe.

@torch --- I agree that a coach is more likely to care about his here and now and living/coaching forever. Some coaches might not care bout a tree (Tarkanian, Eustachy, etc.) and some might (Knight, Iba, Allen, Smith, etc.). And some trees could be the figment of an overactive media mindset. My point with the sustainability aspect is that it SEEMS schools we are trying to emulate (those you noted) have a system that includes promoting from within. It would seem logical to emulate that part of the system as well, including it as just one plank in the overall platform. It does not guarantee success but with our program, any success would be accepted (statement based on data up until 2008).

Here's my bottom line: I believe that had Majerus been around and coached last year, it would have been his last at SLU. He had no contract renewal in place and seemed to be tiring of Biondi's crap. If that was indeed the case, Crews goes as well, taking his one-year stint with him. Remember, it was a personal favor to Rick an dhad Ricvk and Biondi battled more, Crews would have been privvy and subjected to its shrapnel as well. Bronson, Lepore and Platt are all associated with Majerus/Crews so why do they stick around if th ebigger two leave? Some would, some might not. Which leaves us with Whitesell and given the reality of last year in that Whitesell was not named interim, I don't think he is around either. So it's a complete staff wash-out and an utter start from scratch where everythign is wiped clean and nothing is sustained. I think that would have been the case. There will be those who will claim Rick wouldn't have done that, he would have stayed around for Jett, McCall, Loe, Evans and their senior years. Doubt it. Even if he wanted to, I don't think Biondi would have renewed him, given what we now know about Biondi's Machevelian state of mind and demeanor.

I know we lucked into Majerus. It's starting to look like we lucked into Crews (jury still out). We lucked into Chaifetz (doctor and arena, finally). And we also lucked into Biondi's resignation and now his complete ouster by the Board. In those areas, things are looking rosy. Billiken basketball has NEVER been in the heights we find ourselves today. I believe Majerus did the job we all wanted him to do. There is not an iota of doubt anywhere in my body that says we are worse off for having Majerus. NOT ONE.

Twist away, kev.

[moytoy12]

Thanks to Taj and Clock, I believe this is now the longest thread in Billikens.com history.

[kshoe]

Taj, here is the part of your post that Ace highlighted.

"I had hoped Rick was going to start the sustainability thing but clock hits it on the head where he says Rick brought in skills that helped him now. Once this resurrection job was done, he could ride off again into the sunset with his HOF rep intact and claims of rectifying a sinking program resonating louder than before. I would have hoped he cared about what he left behind but that's a moot point now."

The first sentence you say you "hoped" Majerus would start sustainability and then in the last sentence you say you would have hoped he cared about what he left behind but that's a moot point. Both of those statements implied to me that you believed he did not leave a sustained program and that he didn't care about what he left behind. IF I misinterpreted your statement than shame on me but I'll let you tell me.

I probably also took an extra step and saying you said he left the program in bad shape but note I never said you said he left the program in worse shape than when he got there.

[kshoe]

Thanks to Taj and Clock, I believe this is now the longest thread in Billikens.com history.

Certainly the most words...

[jimbofive]

Certainly the most words...

of course that's what he meant, you silly fuok!

[RUBillsFan]

We don't really know how much we pay our Assts only that it less than St. Johns. Does anyone have an idea of what Xavier, Gonzaga or Butler pays? Even historically? Those are the programs we attempting to emulate and they seem to have this coaching carousel thing down pat. Still barring unforeseen circumstances Crews is here at least 5 more years. No need to concern ourselves with his successor. With the way we go through assts, nobody on the staff may be here in 2 years much less 5.

We don't know what X, Gonzaga, Butler, etc. are paying their assistants, but we do know the athletic/basketball budgets. I'm too lazy to look it up now, but the NCAA releases the total $ spent on athletics/basketball. SLU's $ spent are well below those schools, so the assumption is that they are cheaping out in most areas assistant coaches included. The other factor that fuels this assumption is the story (rumor?) that Majerus had to part or all of some of his ACs salary out of his own pocket.

[NextYearBill]

We don't know what X, Gonzaga, Butler, etc. are paying their assistants, but we do know the athletic/basketball budgets. I'm too lazy to look it up now, but the NCAA releases the total $ spent on athletics/basketball. SLU's $ spent are well below those schools, so the assumption is that they are cheaping out in most areas assistant coaches included. The other factor that fuels this assumption is the story (rumor?) that Majerus had to part or all of some of his ACs salary out of his own pocket.

I imagine he would have quit if this were true

[ACE]

IMO, it's not really up to the head coach to have a succession plan, that falls much more on the AD, President, etc. RM built a winner and left the program in great shape. Based on what his good friend Miklasz said, even if his health held out, RM was not going to coach beyond this past season... too much crap with Biondi had built up. There never was a contract extension. But more importantly, he obviously had serious health issues. RM was very responsible and probably did more than he needed to about how he would leave the program by bringing in somebody like Jim Crews... even helped pay him out of his own pocket. What more could we want?

I think this idea of the "coaching tree" is a little overblown. Good programs have the ability to build on their success and sustain it. How does that happen? The school needs to continue to support the basketball program and provide enough resources. When there is a coaching change, the new coach needs to build on past successes on the recruiting front. I think we saw a little glimpse of that with the signing of Roby. We caught his attention with our NCAA Tourney appearance against Memphis. Start stringing together Big Dance trips and the perception of your program begins to change. It should open up recruiting doors. I don't think programs like Gonzaga and Xavier have always had well thought out succession plans. Few has been at Gonzaga a long time now and was simply able to build on what Monson did and take it to another level. Xavier has had more coaching turnover, but I don't think they had a grand coaching plan when they hired Mack. If I recall they looked at a lot of other coaches and got turned down by a few before settling on Mack. I don't believe they had some designated heir apparent.

[slufanskip]

@kshoe ---- set the bias aside for once, will ya? My 277 word post uses the word "program" once. In the context/phrase Majerus could claim "rectifying a sinking program." How that is extrapolated into "taj basically said RM left the program in bad shape?" No candy coating this, your statement is assinine and only proves your reading comprehension on my posts is biased by your general dislike of anything I say.

Only an idiot would state the program now is in worse shape than when Majerus took over and short of your deeply personal and religious belief, I am not that stupid. What did someone say .. we could be some ridiculous 88 and 20 once this year is over counting the last three years total? What I said was in hindsight, I didn't see Majerus leaving us/SLU with an exit strategy. That's all. Maybe his startegy was either Harriman or Jensen, but both left. Given the b*tch he pitched about the Cavs stealing Jensen right before the season started, I was thinking it was Al. Crews was a one-year stop-gap. Whitesell? Platt? Meh. Bronson? Maybe.

@torch --- I agree that a coach is more likely to care about his here and now and living/coaching forever. Some coaches might not care bout a tree (Tarkanian, Eustachy, etc.) and some might (Knight, Iba, Allen, Smith, etc.). And some trees could be the figment of an overactive media mindset. My point with the sustainability aspect is that it SEEMS schools we are trying to emulate (those you noted) have a system that includes promoting from within. It would seem logical to emulate that part of the system as well, including it as just one plank in the overall platform. It does not guarantee success but with our program, any success would be accepted (statement based on data up until 2008).

Here's my bottom line: I believe that had Majerus been around and coached last year, it would have been his last at SLU. He had no contract renewal in place and seemed to be tiring of Biondi's crap. If that was indeed the case, Crews goes as well, taking his one-year stint with him. Remember, it was a personal favor to Rick an dhad Ricvk and Biondi battled more, Crews would have been privvy and subjected to its shrapnel as well. Bronson, Lepore and Platt are all associated with Majerus/Crews so why do they stick around if th ebigger two leave? Some would, some might not. Which leaves us with Whitesell and given the reality of last year in that Whitesell was not named interim, I don't think he is around either. So it's a complete staff wash-out and an utter start from scratch where everythign is wiped clean and nothing is sustained. I think that would have been the case. There will be those who will claim Rick wouldn't have done that, he would have stayed around for Jett, McCall, Loe, Evans and their senior years. Doubt it. Even if he wanted to, I don't think Biondi would have renewed him, given what we now know about Biondi's Machevelian state of mind and demeanor.

I know we lucked into Majerus. It's starting to look like we lucked into Crews (jury still out). We lucked into Chaifetz (doctor and arena, finally). And we also lucked into Biondi's resignation and now his complete ouster by the Board. In those areas, things are looking rosy. Billiken basketball has NEVER been in the heights we find ourselves today. I believe Majerus did the job we all wanted him to do. There is not an iota of doubt anywhere in my body that says we are worse off for having Majerus. NOT ONE.

Twist away, kev.

I don't believe there is any chance RM would have been prevented from staying after last season had he still been with us and wanted to stay. After arguably the 2 best seasons in the last 50 years at SLU you believe Biondi would have not renewed him. That's crazy and there is no chance people like Dr. Chaifitz would have let it happen

[Clock_Tower]

Certainly the most words...

Taj, here is the part of your post that Ace highlighted.

"I had hoped Rick was going to start the sustainability thing but clock hits it on the head where he says Rick brought in skills that helped him now. Once this resurrection job was done, he could ride off again into the sunset with his HOF rep intact and claims of rectifying a sinking program resonating louder than before. I would have hoped he cared about what he left behind but that's a moot point now."

The first sentence you say you "hoped" Majerus would start sustainability and then in the last sentence you say you would have hoped he cared about what he left behind but that's a moot point. Both of those statements implied to me that you believed he did not leave a sustained program and that he didn't care about what he left behind. IF I misinterpreted your statement than shame on me but I'll let you tell me.

I probably also took an extra step and saying you said he left the program in bad shape but note I never said you said he left the program in worse shape than when he got there.

Shoe. Yes, you did take a very large step -- and a wrong one at that. Admit you were wrong, apologize to Taj and move on. Instead, more sarcasm at the number of words and digs at me and Taj. It is you with the reading problem.