Who would you hire to replace CTC?

[JSHoosier 19,817]

Schools that don't let kids out when they dramatically fire their coaches end up in disrepute with kids parents in the future who don't want their kids to be in that situation. Especially schools moving on to their 4th coach in 15 years who didn't make it to the end of their contract.

You didn't say that he should be fired today, but the initial comment I replied to any the entire premise of all my comments has been based on the people saying that he should be fired today. I don't disagree with his seat heating up after another bad season, but that wasn't the comment I replied to.

And we make bad hires because we have a bad reputation with the coaches. No one wants to be the next sacrificial lamb.

Who are your picks who you think would actually come here if Crean were fired this weekend?

I'm not dumb, there aren't any coaches that are sure fire home run hires.  I think Marshall would be interesting, but he's far from a home run.  The only sure fire home run is in Boston and isn't leaving after a just one year.

 

I'm also not on the "consistency for the sake of consistency, success be damned" wagon, if you're consistent with a mediocre coach the only thing you'll end up with is mediocrity.

[KingPG21 6,582]

Why wallow in mediocrity when we could fire Crean, make a poor choice in the next coach, and then dive straight to the bottom?!  Not only would we have an average coach at best but we would be paying for Crean's buy-out.  I think that would be closer to "holding a program hostage," but I'm not an expert on that.  Simple minds, simple solutions.

..... So we can only hire mediocre coaches now? The argument that we should just ride it out with Crean just seems completely insane to me. If he continues to be mediocre as a coach how can that be seen as acceptable. 

[HoosierAloha 30,024]

..... So we can only hire mediocre coaches now? The argument that we should just ride it out with Crean just seems completely insane to me. If he continues to be mediocre as a coach how can that be seen as acceptable. 

 

Name a coach guaranteed to take the job that will undoubtedly be more than mediocre.

[TheStillman 991]

[quote name="KingPG21" post="62876" timestamp="1398535182"]..... So we can only hire mediocre coaches now? The argument that we should just ride it out with Crean just seems completely insane to me. If he continues to be mediocre as a coach how can that be seen as acceptable. [/quote]

What's insane is firing a coach at the cost of $14 million dollars a year after winning the conference and being #1 most of year. "Riding it out" is not the same as giving coach the benefit of one down year before running him out of town. Let's see what happens next year


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

[JuwantGrimeShakes? 533]

I'm not dumb, there aren't any coaches that are sure fire home run hires.  I think Marshall would be interesting, but he's far from a home run.  The only sure fire home run is in Boston and isn't leaving after a just one year.

 

I'm also not on the "consistency for the sake of consistency, success be damned" wagon, if you're consistent with a mediocre coach the only thing you'll end up with is mediocrity.

I'm totally with you on that. And I'm not on that wagon either, I just see the reality of the situation. We'll trade mediocrity we know for mediocrity we don't and in 5 years wonder who the next coach should be. It's simply too early to fire Crean and expect to be able to bring someone great in to replace him. If we had someone like Stevens waiting in the wings then I could be on board but we don't, we'll be in a similar situation as when we hired Crean. Especially since the coaching carousel has almost finished its rotations for the year. 

And it's not even consistency for the sake of consistency, it's consistency for the sake of reputation. It's the same reason people stay in bad jobs for a year when they could leave after three months so that they don't look like inconsistent job hoppers. No one wants to hire someone who can't hold a job long-term, no one wants to work somewhere that turns over a position constantly. The way that fans view a coaching job and potential hires view a coaching job are vastly different.

 

..... So we can only hire mediocre coaches now? The argument that we should just ride it out with Crean just seems completely insane to me. If he continues to be mediocre as a coach how can that be seen as acceptable. 

As I said in every one of my posts. Name a great coach that we could hire and would come here if we fired Crean tomorrow? We'll almost certainly end up with another middle of the road coach if we continue to make this a short-term position with high risks. No reputable coach wants to come to a program that has 4 coaches in 15 years and fires a coach after a single bad season. Unless you know one who does.

[HoosierAloha 30,024]

What's insane is firing a coach at the cost of $14 million dollars a year after winning the conference and being #1 most of year. "Riding it out" is not the same as giving coach the benefit of one down year before running him out of town. Let's see what happens next year


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

 

That conference championship and #1 seed was all due to the players.  We know Crean can't draw up a play to save his life. 

[NotTheReal HoosierHoopster 67]

That conference championship and #1 seed was all due to the players. We know Crean can't draw up a play to save his life.

And we saw how he squandered that number 1 seed.

[HoosierAloha 30,024]

And we saw how he squandered that number 1 seed.

 

That wasn't the players that was the coach.  We succeed = players, we fail = coach.  Rinse and repeat

[djsalway 4,161]

That wasn't the players that was the coach. We succeed = players, we fail = coach. Rinse and repeat

I don't know. I'm willing to say that the Syracuse loss in the tournament when we had the 1 seed was half on Crean and half on Cody playing like a baby.

[HoosierAloha 30,024]

I don't know. I'm willing to say that the Syracuse loss in the tournament when we had the 1 seed was half on Crean and half on Cody playing like a baby.

 

That's not how it works.  B1G regular season champs = players despite crean, loss in Sweet 16 = crean's fault!

[JuwantGrimeShakes? 533]

And we saw how he squandered that number 1 seed.

Don't get me wrong here, I absolutely blame Crean for that loss. We looked helpless against the zone and always do. Why he can't figure out how to teach these kids how to crack it is totally beyond me, as is why every team doesn't just break it out when they play us knowing how weak we are against it.

Cody playing like an adult would have helped, but I still see us having been dashed on those rocks.

That having been said, in 2013 only 1 1 seed made the elite 8, this year only two did. We weren't even the first 1 seed out, Gonzaga lost in the Round of 32. It's the tournament, anything can happen. That's why it's so darned entertaining.

[djsalway 4,161]

That's not how it works. B1G regular season champs = players despite crean, loss in Sweet 16 = crean's fault!

I know that's not how it works, but come on. We all saw Cody in that game. He was the preseason player of the year and an all-American and he played awful. I personally put some blame on him.

[mdn82 25,510]

I don't know. I'm willing to say that the Syracuse loss in the tournament when we had the 1 seed was half on Crean and half on Cody playing like a baby.

Yogi's multi-turnover start to the game didn't set the tone right either.  It was like watching the same turnover on repeat too.  He would drive to the foul line and jump in the mouth of the zone.  I would be willing to bet Crean didn't tell his 6' freshman guard to do that.  I would also be surprised if the game plan was to get Cody to the rim when Syracuse had 2 7' in the game at all times.  The problem is the only time we had any success was when Vic or Will got the ball at the foul line.  We just didn't do enough of it.  Crean should have forced that situation.  You have to impose your will against a zone.  We really seemed clueless that game.  

[mdn82 25,510]

Don't get me wrong here, I absolutely blame Crean for that loss. We looked helpless against the zone and always do. Why he can't figure out how to teach these kids how to crack it is totally beyond me, as is why every team doesn't just break it out when they play us knowing how weak we are against it.

Cody playing like an adult would have helped, but I still see us having been dashed on those rocks.

That having been said, in 2013 only 1 1 seed made the elite 8, this year only two did. We weren't even the first 1 seed out, Gonzaga lost in the Round of 32. It's the tournament, anything can happen. That's why it's so darned entertaining.

 

I think his offense that tries to force breakdowns of defenses is no good against a zone.  Think of this.  When he does his weave, what moves the zone?  The only thing he is moving is his players.  That is an easy matchup for a zone.  I have went back to this for a couple of months, but the offense that we ran against UM had our athletes coming from all angles.  That flex could work against that zone.  It made the zone move to hit the cutter and had a shooter slide in behind the cutter.  IMO, I would like to see that incorporated more when teams move to a zone.  There is a reason teams go to a zone so much against us.  If our offense was better against the zone than man teams would run a man.  

[JuwantGrimeShakes? 533]

I think his offense that tries to force breakdowns of defenses is no good against a zone.  Think of this.  When he does his weave, what moves the zone?  The only thing he is moving is his players.  That is an easy matchup for a zone.  I have went back to this for a couple of months, but the offense that we ran against UM had our athletes coming from all angles.  That flex could work against that zone.  It made the zone move to hit the cutter and had a shooter slide in behind the cutter.  IMO, I would like to see that incorporated more when teams move to a zone.  There is a reason teams go to a zone so much against us.  If our offense was better against the zone than man teams would run a man.  

I think you're right on about that. Zone is the antithesis of our offense. So, the alternative is to switch our offensive scheme or nearly abandon the inside and just start jacking threes. One of Michigan's games went like that in the Big Ten Tourney but I can't remember which. They couldn't get any penetration so they just stayed on the outside and made them pay for the zone. We had the shooters to do that if they could have gotten shots to drop that night. 

[mdn82 25,510]

I think you're right on about that. Zone is the antithesis of our offense. So, the alternative is to switch our offensive scheme or nearly abandon the inside and just start jacking threes. One of Michigan's games went like that in the Big Ten Tourney but I can't remember which. They couldn't get any penetration so they just stayed on the outside and made them pay for the zone. We had the shooters to do that if they could have gotten shots to drop that night. 

You also need a good mix of inside out to beat a zone.  Even our bigs typically start their offense outside.  In a zone we are just easy to guard.  My biggest pet peeve when watching us play the zone is everyone dribbles.  Seriously, I think I learned in elementary that the ball does not touch the floor unless you are getting to the free throw line in a zone.  Dribbling allows the defense to recover.  When they recover they control the possession.  When they move, you will get a better shot.  IMO, that is on coaching.  We have a lot of very solid, yet raw with fundamentals kids.  Ultra athletic with high upside.  Problem is in situations like this they rarely know what to do.  I think Crean tends to get the most out of his kids, but his kids since he has been here have struggled with fundamentals.  That is why you see a lot of turnovers.  That is why you see a lot of breakdowns at both ends.  I think he can be good, but coaches like Bo Ryan and Beilein do an excellent job of stressing fundamentals.  That gets your team more shots.  

[8bucks 6,346]

[quote name="djsalway" post="62927" timestamp="1398544709"]I know that's not how it works, but come on. We all saw Cody in that game. He was the preseason player of the year and an all-American and he played awful. I personally put some blame on him.[/quote]

Michigan played the same zone a few days later and Mitch played the middle like Cody should have. Like any coaching manual says against a zone. When Cody repeatedly caught and drove and never looked for the shot that is initially on the player but as a coach you have to pull him out and make a change. That is on Crean.

It was also apparent our single strategy relied on Yogi dribbling in and beating them somehow. Cody did not seem to have a clue what to do and that is on Crean too.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

[NotTheReal HoosierHoopster 67]

Michigan played the same zone a few days later and Mitch played the middle like Cody should have. Like any coaching manual says against a zone. When Cody repeatedly caught and drove and never looked for the shot that is initially on the player but as a coach you have to pull him out and make a change. That is on Crean.

It was also apparent our single strategy relied on Yogi dribbling in and beating them somehow. Cody did not seem to have a clue what to do and that is on Crean too.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

Good post

[JSHoosier 19,817]

I think you're right on about that. Zone is the antithesis of our offense. So, the alternative is to switch our offensive scheme or nearly abandon the inside and just start jacking threes. One of Michigan's games went like that in the Big Ten Tourney but I can't remember which. They couldn't get any penetration so they just stayed on the outside and made them pay for the zone. We had the shooters to do that if they could have gotten shots to drop that night. 

You have to be smart about how you get the ball inside though.  You can't just feed it to the post because it's too well guarded and leads to turnovers, the zone is designed to take that away.  You can get the ball to the middle and look for a cut from the short corner.  There were a lot of times Will cut to the heart and we didn't even look at him, and it drove me crazy.  I yelled at the TV a lot of times to get the ball to the middle because that's where it's weakest.

 

In a way it is the antithesis of our offense like you said.  In theory we're trying to reverse the ball, but the way we do it is ineffective.  Pass dribble dribble dribble rinse and repeat just doesn't work, you have to move the ball fast enough to catch the defense rotating and open up the gaps but we waste time dribbling and the defense gets reset before the make the next pass.  It makes us look utterly clueless against the zone.

[OliviaPope40 6,432]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPlWUrG0AC0

Since we mentioned Cody and the Syracuse game here are his film which I will never watch :o