Slufan10 Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 what if we hired Seth Greenberg as the next head coach? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stmdragons Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 2 minutes ago, Slufan10 said: what if we hired Seth Greenberg as the next head coach? We would certainly build upon our storied history in the NIT. brianstl likes this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 5 hours ago, Cowboy II said: -Chris Mack would be a great hire but I am not going to allow myself to get excited until there is a press conference -remember, CFord has a Plan CFord? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Pelican Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 1 hour ago, Old guy said: CFord? Oh for cryin' out loud. Coach Ford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 6 hours ago, Slufan10 said: what if we hired Seth Greenberg as the next head coach? you must be too young to remember seth coaching. basically a worse ford. absolutely the worst floor coach maybe ever to reach the level he did. Box and Won likes this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquinas Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Mack would be a big statement hire. I think it depends in 3 major things. 1. What he is looking for in a school/conference. 2. What he will make. 3. How much NIL commitment there is. He will be very expensive and would require BIG donor commitment. brianstl likes this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMM28 Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Mack should have always, and may have always been, candidate #1 on any list. The guy has a winning record in 9 NCAA tournament appearances. He's coached very successfully at a very similar institution. Ford should have been canned by now and Mack should have been named head coach by now if this program had any semblance of leadership. The only "negative" I can see with Mack is that he doesn't have a rebuild on his resume. He came into a successful program that had been in the Elite 8 the year prior, but under his assistant-ship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy II Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 16 minutes ago, JMM28 said: Mack should have always, and may have always been, candidate #1 on any list. The guy has a winning record in 9 NCAA tournament appearances. He's coached very successfully at a very similar institution. Ford should have been canned by now and Mack should have been named head coach by now if this program had any semblance of leadership. The only "negative" I can see with Mack is that he doesn't have a rebuild on his resume. He came into a successful program that had been in the Elite 8 the year prior, but under his assistant-ship. -and he kept it going with his players and made an Elite Eight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheA_Bomb Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 My concern is could Mack overcome a bad AD should May be retained? I think he'd do well, but imagine what SLU could do with an AD competent at marketing(social media), aligning boosters/teams/organization, running compliance, business decisions (TV, radio, conference), network for scheduling. We could do so much better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgstl Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 1 minute ago, TheA_Bomb said: My concern is could Mack overcome a bad AD should May be retained? I think he'd do well, but imagine what SLU could do with an AD competent at marketing(social media), aligning boosters/teams/organization, running compliance, business decisions (TV, radio, conference), network for scheduling. We could do so much better. All of those are cool, but winning solves much of those problems. Also May would get out of the way, I'm sure of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 50 minutes ago, JMM28 said: Mack should have always, and may have always been, candidate #1 on any list. The guy has a winning record in 9 NCAA tournament appearances. He's coached very successfully at a very similar institution. Ford should have been canned by now and Mack should have been named head coach by now if this program had any semblance of leadership. The only "negative" I can see with Mack is that he doesn't have a rebuild on his resume. He came into a successful program that had been in the Elite 8 the year prior, but under his assistant-ship. imo mack's biggest negative is he will likely be expensive. with recruiting taking a backseat now in actually buildiing a team (now it is all about "how much will i make?") imo the most important aspect of a coach now becomes actually being a coach. i.e. floor coach, practive coach development coach. mack isnt going to come back to coaching to take a paycut likely. why not find an up and comer that might work for $1 million or even less that has the energy and drive to actually coach the team. not saying mack wouldnt do the work i'm saying so will less known coaches and thus leave more money to put into the now pay to play mentality that NiL has brought to college athletics. i'm still all in on schertz. MB73, 2010andBeyond and Bay Area Billiken like this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgstl Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 5 minutes ago, billiken_roy said: imo mack's biggest negative is he will likely be expensive. with recruiting taking a backseat now in actually buildiing a team (now it is all about "how much will i make?") imo the most important aspect of a coach now becomes actually being a coach. i.e. floor coach, practive coach development coach. mack isnt going to come back to coaching to take a paycut likely. why not find an up and comer that might work for $1 million or even less that has the energy and drive to actually coach the team. not saying mack wouldnt do the work i'm saying so will less known coaches and thus leave more money to put into the now pay to play mentality that NiL has brought to college athletics. i'm still all in on schertz. He probably will. 3-3.75 likely I'd think. If attendance goes up by 3000 it cancels the difference in what Ford was paid .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 3 minutes ago, billiken_roy said: imo mack's biggest negative is he will likely be expensive. with recruiting taking a backseat now in actually buildiing a team (now it is all about "how much will i make?") imo the most important aspect of a coach now becomes actually being a coach. i.e. floor coach, practive coach development coach. mack isnt going to come back to coaching to take a paycut likely. why not find an up and comer that might work for $1 million or even less that has the energy and drive to actually coach the team. not saying mack wouldnt do the work i'm saying so will less known coaches and thus leave more money to put into the now pay to play mentality that NiL has brought to college athletics. i'm still all in on schertz. Jay Wright left just in time. The coaching landscape is a mess. brianstl, White Pelican and billiken_roy like this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 4 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said: My concern is could Mack overcome a bad AD should May be retained? I think he'd do well, but imagine what SLU could do with an AD competent at marketing(social media), aligning boosters/teams/organization, running compliance, business decisions (TV, radio, conference), network for scheduling. We could do so much better. Mack would be a great hire, probably third or fourth on my list. Would be the top guy if the college basketball world was the same as it was three years ago. I somewhat worry about how a guy with an established track record at the top level is willing to adjust to a completely different way you have to run a program now, especially when he has been out of the game in the time while the biggest changes happened. ACE and billiken_roy like this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenHudDude Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 3 minutes ago, brianstl said: Mack would be a great hire, probably third or fourth on my list. Would be the top guy if the college basketball world was the same as it was three years ago. I somewhat worry about how a guy with an established track record at the top level is willing to adjust to a completely different way you have to run a program now, especially when he has been out of the game in the time while the biggest changes happened. Just curious. You have probably stated this before, but who are the 2 or 3 you would rather have instead of Mack? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheA_Bomb Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 1 minute ago, brianstl said: Mack would be a great hire, probably third or fourth on my list. Would be the top guy if the college basketball world was the same as it was three years ago. I somewhat worry about how a guy with an established track record at the top level is willing to adjust to a completely different way you have to run a program now, especially when he has been out of the game in the time while the biggest changes happened. This is why I think a good AD is important. The AD works those boosters and works with the BVF to get them aligned with what the coach needs. Also just pumping up your team in marketing. 2 teams being equal, but 1 has more helium that team gets invited to the good MTE, at large whatever, gets the recruit on the fence. Every little thing adds up. The AD uses their network to help piece together a schedule that can give you a good NET. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy II Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 37 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said: My concern is could Mack overcome a bad AD should May be retained? I think he'd do well, but imagine what SLU could do with an AD competent at marketing(social media), aligning boosters/teams/organization, running compliance, business decisions (TV, radio, conference), network for scheduling. We could do so much better. -perhaps semantics but we don't need an AD that can do the tasks you mention, we need an AD that can get qualified people to do these things, set the vision, give them the tools and let them do it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheA_Bomb Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 8 minutes ago, Cowboy II said: -perhaps semantics but we don't need an AD that can do the tasks you mention, we need an AD that can get qualified people to do these things, set the vision, give them the tools and let them do it However it gets done. Yes they don't have to actually do it but it needs to happen in the organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 47 minutes ago, CenHudDude said: Just curious. You have probably stated this before, but who are the 2 or 3 you would rather have instead of Mack? My top two would be McCollum and Schertz. I favor McCollum slightly over Schertz, but I can convince myself Schertz is the better hire. Then Mack and Moser, either would be great hire. Because of the pieces he would potentially bring with him, Schertz would be the guy that would offer you the best guarantee of having a tournament team next season out of any of the candidates. I think it is probably tougher for any other candidate to build a tourney roster that could gel that quick. I think there is just a huge advantage to being able to bring 4 or more guys along with the coach. They all don't even have to be stars or all even starters, but it just helps so much in setting the culture and helps everyone else understand what the coach wants. It paid off for Mizzou with Gates and the Cleveland St. guys last season. Schertz has a better and younger roster at ISU that you can build from than Gates. Robbie Avila alone is worth the price of admission and is a future All-American, IMO. McCollum is my top choice because in the new world of NIL, you hire the best basketball mind to coach your team and worry far less about the coach's ability to recruit at a high level. I think McCollum is the best basketball mind we can hire. We aren't talking about Kim Anderson and we shouldn't be worried if he can recruit at this level. Give me the guy that has had the best run of any coach at any level of NCAA basketball since John Wooden. Give me the guy that can spot the talent in Justin Pitts, Ryan Hawkins and Trevor Hudgins that every D1 coached missed. Give me the guy that keeps losing talent like that to graduation or transferring Creighton, but just keeps piling up the victories year after year. Slu let the dogs out?, Bay Area Billiken, Bizziken and 1 other like this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Mack would be great. I understand the concerns of him being out of the game in the biggest change in NCAA history and needing to be a part of a rebuild. But it is easier to rebuild in this environment. He's probably my #2 behind Schertz at this point but any of the top 3 or 4 are pretty interchangeable. brianstl likes this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slu let the dogs out? Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 1 hour ago, brianstl said: My top two would be McCollum and Schertz. I favor McCollum slightly over Schertz, but I can convince myself Schertz is the better hire. Then Mack and Moser, either would be great hire. Because of the pieces he would potentially bring with him, Schertz would be the guy that would offer you the best guarantee of having a tournament team next season out of any of the candidates. I think it is probably tougher for any other candidate to build a tourney roster that could gel that quick. I think there is just a huge advantage to being able to bring 4 or more guys along with the coach. They all don't even have to be stars or all even starters, but it just helps so much in setting the culture and helps everyone else understand what the coach wants. It paid off for Mizzou with Gates and the Cleveland St. guys last season. Schertz has a better and younger roster at ISU that you can build from than Gates. Robbie Avila alone is worth the price of admission and is a future All-American, IMO. McCollum is my top choice because in the new world of NIL, you hire the best basketball mind to coach your team and worry far less about the coach's ability to recruit at a high level. I think McCollum is the best basketball mind we can hire. We aren't talking about Kim Anderson and we shouldn't be worried if he can recruit at this level. Give me the guy that has had the best run of any coach at any level of NCAA basketball since John Wooden. Give me the guy that can spot the talent in Justin Pitts, Ryan Hawkins and Trevor Hudgins that every D1 coached missed. Give me the guy that keeps losing talent like that to graduation or transferring Creighton, but just keeps piling up the victories year after year. Schertz is in my top 3 but do we honestly think Avila is sticking around the mid-majors next season? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 Ford is 100% gone but this message board may permanently break if May came out and said we're keeping Ford another year. It would almost be interesting to experience. TheA_Bomb likes this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 8 minutes ago, Slu let the dogs out? said: Schertz is in my top 3 but do we honestly think Avila is sticking around the mid-majors next season? Good point. Even if you land the coach, that doesn't mean you get the player. Avila's stock is through the roof right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamJAMTIME Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 9 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said: Good point. Even if you land the coach, that doesn't mean you get the player. Avila's stock is through the roof right now. And how do transferring players work with our NIL? I thought SLU's plan was to use the BVF for players that stick with SLU for multiple years, not to entice players (like every other university). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted March 5 Share Posted March 5 6 minutes ago, RamJAMTIME said: And how do transferring players work with our NIL? I thought SLU's plan was to use the BVF for players that stick with SLU for multiple years, not to entice players (like every other university). Hopefully a new coach can talk the BVF out of that plan. I think SLU's NIL budget is probably pretty good but their NIL plan seems awful Billikenbooster likes this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.