Jump to content
Billikens.com Message Board
Sign in to follow this  
Quality Is Job 1

Semi-OT: Was it Crews or May who tanked the program?

Recommended Posts

On 1/10/2013 at 7:49 AM, Clock_Tower said:

The game against Santa Clara was a bad loss. On a computer model, a loss to a pretty good team can be said to be "not a bad loss" but to me, it was the worst performance I've seen our Bills give in years. We were thoroughly outplayed in every facet of the game including hustling. That game, a home game against a good (not great) team -- not a "name" school, lead to more negative press coverage and established the belief that our team sucked, killed any preseason momentum for this team, suppressed attendance at future games and ended the excitement and promise of the best Billiken season in years. Also, we witnessed no adjustments or timeouts being called and that game alone is responsible for most on this Board solidifying their position that Crews is a good man, that we are thankful for his current services but that he is not our head coach next year.

Revisionist history is wrong. That was a terrible game and a bad loss.

 

6 minutes ago, Clock_Tower said:

+1

I'm copying this out and starting a new thread, because it doesn't really fit in the Coach-on-the-radio thread.

Yes, @Clock_Tower, there were posters, including yourself, who were against Jim Crews during the midst of the season prior to the run to the (double) 2013 A-10 Championship.  Even I was leaning that way.  But I asked you for posts from February or March — meaning after they were on their way to the regular-season title and an NCAA Tournament bid.  In my mind, and others, as well, that changed the nature of the narrative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/5/2013 at 4:20 PM, Clock_Tower said:

You're right about Jim Crews winning right now. And I'll go one futher and say that we should win in similar fashion next year to what we are doing this year. In that sense, Crews is not just inheriting a team for this year only. Yes, we lose KM, CE and CR but we return all the rest (along with marginal improvements by all) who would probably play better next year for Crews (using the same system as this year) than if we bring in a new coach with a new system, etc. Therefore, Crews is not just winning this year but he/we should win next year as well -- especially if Butler and X leave the A10.

By then, we should know if Crews is able to replace this year's class and next year's class. If not, we are in deep trouble with with a coach who has 4 years left on his contract!! Now, if the decision is made to go with Crews (and all already know my thoughts on this subject), then I sure hope we sign him with a 5 year contract (which he can tell recruits) but that it contains a minimal buyout clause based upon poor performance.

 

On 3/5/2013 at 10:24 AM, Clock_Tower said:

DeSmet. I agree with the approach that you, Skip and others suggest: that we continue the national search and that we test the market. If Jim Crews turns out to the best coach available, I am fine with that. But to hand him the keys based upon how he has run RM's veteran team would be a major mistake.

A Bomb. The fact that Jim Crews is able do well with a veteran team tells me that Crews has earned the respect of the guys in the locker and that he has the skills to coach and motivate current players. It certainly is a positive which cannot be ignored. To his credit, I would certainly say that Jim Crews now appears to be in control of this team. I was the at the Santa Clara game and Coach Crews was completely lost -- deer in the headlights confused. The guys did not play hard, well or smart. Timeouts were not called. No change of strategy was made. When stoppages did occur, not much positive appeared to come out of the stoppage of action. These past two (2) months, the play of the team and the actions of Jim Crews on this sidelines has greatly changed my opinion on this aspect of coaching. At the same time, his prior 35 years of coaching should also not be ignored. Remember, though, that success this year says absolutely nothing about his ability to recruit, to develop players, to hire/manage coaches and to otherwise run the basketball program. Sorry, but I am underwhelmed by Crews' hire of his friend Jim Platt. And sorry, but KC was a real talent and while he may have been a knucklehead and may have been fed bad advice, our head coach needs to be able to handle, impress, motivate and console AAU prima donnas -- that's part of the job. If Crews is retained, we will be good/fine next year but the year after (our first in the new Big East, could be a real disaster if we cannot land guys this Spring!!).

Let me ask it this way. Does anyone think paying Jim Crews $1.5 million to $2 million per year is too much? If so, I'd suggest this is proof that Jim Crews is not the right hire.

 

On 3/5/2013 at 10:50 AM, Clock_Tower said:

McCarthy. With each post, you actually make my point.

First, as pointed out, this is 2013 -- not the 1980s or 1990s!!

Second, here is Jim Crews' body of work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Crews

As you can see, he made it to to the NCAA Tourney only 4 times in his entire career and only made it past the first round (to the second round) one time!! Since 1993 (20 years ago!!), Crews has been to the NCAA Tourney only once -- 1989 -- which was another first round loss despite having the first place team from the MVC. The rest of his time with the MVC, Jim Crews (from 1994 to 2002), Crews finished 5th, tied for 5th, tied for 4th, 6th, 6th, 6th and then tied for 9th before being fired in 2002. Overall at Evansville, Crews was 294 wins and 209 losses -- that's a .584 winning percentage!! Thereafter, he coached Army for 7 years (no one held a gun to his head and made him coach there) and posted a record of 59 wins and 140losses with the assistance of Jim Platt.

Third, I can name around a few hundred guys who can claim the same title of being a "Bobby Knight disciple". Not impressed with that argument but I'll take Bobby Knight himself for the next 5 years!!

Fourth, Brad Soderberg was a failure here so if your argument is that Jim Crews is better than Soderberg, my response is: I sure hope so!!

Fifth, the RM coaching tree is not as impressive as you might think it is.

Sixth, be careful of comments made oppposing coaches. For instance, I would expect every A10 coach who visits Philly to say wonderful things about Phil Martelli, the dean of A10 coaches, the 2004 National Coach of the Year.... As a Bills fan, I hope St. Joe's signs him up for another 5 years --- to ensure 5 more years of winning by our Bills!!


Thank you, Clock, for finding this.  You definitely were against hiring Crews the whole time.  It appears you were the voice of one crying from the wilderness.  I still question, though, whether we'd be in as good of a place now if there had been a "national search" for a coach in March 2013 after Crews won the '13 coach of the year while honoring Majerus and leading the team to a double championship in the A-10 and to the NCAA Tournament.

Would SLU's coach of the future have come to the university under those circumstances?  We'll never know, but I suspect SLU fans would be in a less promising place right now if things had gone differently than they did.  To me, in the long run, I'd trade those two bottoming-out years that led to Ford, who can rebuild and build a program over someone who would keep the program mired in repeating patterns of quick fixes and bottoming out.  I think that's what SLU would have gotten itself into in 2013.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were no Majerus or Ford type candidates available in 2013.  The coaching hires who have had the greatest successes from that year were guys who had never been head coaches - Chris Jans, Kevin Keatts, etc.  There"s no way any Saint Louis AD would have followed up a banner season by handing the keys to a relative newbie.  It's just not in the cultural DNA of the school. 

We were fortunate that Travis Ford became available when he did.  We might have Bryce Drew or Joe Dooley at the helm right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not read through all the threads...But I am going to discourage future bumping of 7 year old threads as it clutters up the board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SluSignGuy said:

I have not read through all the threads...But I am going to discourage future bumping of 7 year old threads as it clutters up the board.

Yeah, I wanted Clock to link the posts; I copied them out into a new thread to keep things current (and on topic).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

 

 


Thank you, Clock, for finding this.  You definitely were against hiring Crews the whole time.  It appears you were the voice of one crying from the wilderness.  I still question, though, whether we'd be in as good of a place now if there had been a "national search" for a coach in March 2013 after Crews won the '13 coach of the year while honoring Majerus and leading the team to a double championship in the A-10 and to the NCAA Tournament.

Would SLU's coach of the future have come to the university under those circumstances?  We'll never know, but I suspect SLU fans would be in a less promising place right now if things had gone differently than they did.  To me, in the long run, I'd trade those two bottoming-out years that led to Ford, who can rebuild and build a program over someone who would keep the program mired in repeating patterns of quick fixes and bottoming out.  I think that's what SLU would have gotten itself into in 2013.

Thicks. Not sure we needed to tank the program for 2 years only to then have Ford begin the rebuild - which then stalled with Situation 2.   Interesting question you pose though. Take the underperforming first year of Jim Crews with Jett, et al and then watch the 2 year trainwreck only to then land Coach Ford or go with a “home run” hire back then other than Ford.  

3 Star.  In 2013, we could have hired a top assistant off a P5 squad with cash from Dr C or we could have hired a lower level head coach  - both who were still employed and always employed.  We did not need to hire only the pool of recently fired head coaches. Also, keep in mind that winning in the A10 can be easier than in certain P5 leagues.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on the 2013 posts in this thread I nominate Clock for AD. Completely nailed it. The description of the Santa Clara game is spot on as well. Definitely remember how awful that was. Only flaw was assuming Crews earned the respect of the players and could motivate them, when all indications now are they won every single game in spite of him 😑

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is just an attempt to take prior garbage each one of us has posted at some time or the other for the purpose of proving they were right or they were wrong while others were on the opposite side. Only one man was always right, Jesus. We all know he was crucified by his grateful compatriots. It really does not matter after all these years, it is water under the bridge. Clock was correct then, he will not be correct always. None of us will ever be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I locked the older bumped threads regarding Crews to try to get threads off the front page.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/12/2020 at 8:49 PM, Quality Is Job 1 said:

 

 


Thank you, Clock, for finding this.  You definitely were against hiring Crews the whole time.  It appears you were the voice of one crying from the wilderness.  I still question, though, whether we'd be in as good of a place now if there had been a "national search" for a coach in March 2013 after Crews won the '13 coach of the year while honoring Majerus and leading the team to a double championship in the A-10 and to the NCAA Tournament.

Would SLU's coach of the future have come to the university under those circumstances?  We'll never know, but I suspect SLU fans would be in a less promising place right now if things had gone differently than they did.  To me, in the long run, I'd trade those two bottoming-out years that led to Ford, who can rebuild and build a program over someone who would keep the program mired in repeating patterns of quick fixes and bottoming out.  I think that's what SLU would have gotten itself into in 2013.

There were plenty of other posters who made the same position at the time. The problem was there was this groundswell that it would be impossible to not hire the COY.  Only an idiot would do that - well as I have said before his COY was out of respect for RM.  It was the perfect storm for Crews to bilk us and he did.  Biondi wanted him because he was cheaper than RM and because since RM signed with us coaching salaries had sky rocketed.  RM was actually a bargain at the time - $1 million a year.  This was simply another cost control move by Biond.. Who tanked the program - May was handcuffed but I am not sure he had the metal to challenge Biondi like Levick did, Crews of course has to share some blame for he was at the tiller, but my money is on Biondi - same old same old with him - get a little success and then put the brakes on instead of stepping on the gas.  This program never had a chance under Biondi.  Biondi did some good things no denying it but when it came to do the right thing for athletics he never understood and ended up cutting his own throat by being small minded.

As far as saying there were no other viable candidates that year - Biondi could have gone after someone if he would only buck up and that was against his nature.  If you buy that argument then give Crews a 2 year contract - that slug was going nowhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, Cowboy. Which of those 3 was Crews.  I forget. I'm old. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May was the fool, or culprit. He was in the driver’s seat, had full knowledge of Crews’ pronounced and thoroughly documented lack of recruiting abilities and game management, and still offered a huge contract, $$$$ and duration, for a retired coach. He also did not demand Crews hire a firecracker 🧨 recruiter to overcome the known shortcomings.

Unlike Soderberg, there was a complete book on Crews. He never was going to be a dynamic hire with boundless energy, no great x and o strategist, no game management, no stellar motivator, and lousy recruiting as the cherry on the collapsed cake. 
 

He should have gotten a two year bridge contract offer, instead of the house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Sheltiedave said:

May was the fool, or culprit. He was in the driver’s seat, had full knowledge of Crews’ pronounced and thoroughly documented lack of recruiting abilities and game management, and still offered a huge contract, $$$$ and duration, for a retired coach. He also did not demand Crews hire a firecracker 🧨 recruiter to overcome the known shortcomings.

Unlike Soderberg, there was a complete book on Crews. He never was going to be a dynamic hire with boundless energy, no great x and o strategist, no game management, no stellar motivator, and lousy recruiting as the cherry on the collapsed cake. 
 

He should have gotten a two year bridge contract offer, instead of the house.

May had no control - Biondi made all the money decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/13/2020 at 10:16 AM, RiseAndGrind said:

The last two the same person?

Hmmm, appears to be the case but need more pics to be certain. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sheltiedave said:

May was the fool, or culprit. He was in the driver’s seat, had full knowledge of Crews’ pronounced and thoroughly documented lack of recruiting abilities and game management, and still offered a huge contract, $$$$ and duration, for a retired coach. He also did not demand Crews hire a firecracker 🧨 recruiter to overcome the known shortcomings.

Unlike Soderberg, there was a complete book on Crews. He never was going to be a dynamic hire with boundless energy, no great x and o strategist, no game management, no stellar motivator, and lousy recruiting as the cherry on the collapsed cake. 
 

He should have gotten a two year bridge contract offer, instead of the house.

I tend to agree with you about AD May - though he is still at SLU.   Why is AD May still here if it was all on him?   I ask not to beat a dead horse, and at the risk of diverting attention from  important topics such as fudge/aquariums and how many moving screens the best A10 player in years commits, I ask b/c I truly would like to know who really does call the shots regarding our head coach at SLU?

We know it was not Cheryl Levick.   Again, we sure could have done worse than Brad Soderberg when our AD only had a budget of $280k to $320k, but knowing that Dr. C and Novelly would help us land Majerus and increase the budget to $1 million, why would Cheryl not be in the loop?   Why not call Cheryl in and say - stop supporting Brad on your limited budget, we now by $1 million and we are going after RM.   Instead, Fr. Biondi kept her out of the loop, embarrassed her and she had no choice but to quit. Fr. Biondi took all the credit - though Dr. C and Novelly were standing by his side.

After the friction between RM and Fr. Biondi started to boil over, AD May (who was hired AFTER Majerus) was quiet.  The relationship between Fr. B and RM deteriorated - and then RM is hospitalized and soon thereafter passes away.  What happened next?   Was not Dr. C and his check book still around to hire another "splash hire" after RM passed.  Did Dr. C approve of Crews?   Was the decision to hire Crews all done by Fr. B to go back on the cheap?   Fr. B went cheap after Spoon left with Romar and then even cheaper with Brad after Romar left -- though Dr. C was not involved back then. 

We all know that Dr. C helped us hire Ford (and is currently helping pay Ford). We were recently reminded that Dr. C did not like Crews --- but did Dr. C begin his dislike of Crews AFTER Crews was the permanent coach?   After Crews had to coach SLU without RM's players?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crews got like $800 k to coach. That ain't what I'd call cheap given his resume. Please correct if I'm wrong on his salary. He had to think he'd landed in la la land. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crews retired after Army, with a termination for cause. He verbally and physically abused a player multiple times, and was canned weeks before the new season started.

 Biondi Was a major control freak, but may could have said “let me look for another asst coach we can slide in under 800k” and Biondi would bite. He could also ask Dr. c for help if he wanted to get RM v2. Biondi would back anything Dr C wanted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Clock_Tower said:

I tend to agree with you about AD May - though he is still at SLU.   Why is AD May still here if it was all on him?   I ask not to beat a dead horse, and at the risk of diverting attention from  important topics such as fudge/aquariums and how many moving screens the best A10 player in years commits, I ask b/c I truly would like to know who really does call the shots regarding our head coach at SLU?

We know it was not Cheryl Levick.   Again, we sure could have done worse than Brad Soderberg when our AD only had a budget of $280k to $320k, but knowing that Dr. C and Novelly would help us land Majerus and increase the budget to $1 million, why would Cheryl not be in the loop?   Why not call Cheryl in and say - stop supporting Brad on your limited budget, we now by $1 million and we are going after RM.   Instead, Fr. Biondi kept her out of the loop, embarrassed her and she had no choice but to quit. Fr. Biondi took all the credit - though Dr. C and Novelly were standing by his side.

After the friction between RM and Fr. Biondi started to boil over, AD May (who was hired AFTER Majerus) was quiet.  The relationship between Fr. B and RM deteriorated - and then RM is hospitalized and soon thereafter passes away.  What happened next?   Was not Dr. C and his check book still around to hire another "splash hire" after RM passed.  Did Dr. C approve of Crews?   Was the decision to hire Crews all done by Fr. B to go back on the cheap?   Fr. B went cheap after Spoon left with Romar and then even cheaper with Brad after Romar left -- though Dr. C was not involved back then. 

We all know that Dr. C helped us hire Ford (and is currently helping pay Ford). We were recently reminded that Dr. C did not like Crews --- but did Dr. C begin his dislike of Crews AFTER Crews was the permanent coach?   After Crews had to coach SLU without RM's players?

Chris May is our best AD since Larry Albus. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, willie said:

Chris May is our best AD since Larry Albus. 

Dont know Larry but Debbie yow was great

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...