Exactly. This pretty much sums it up. Including the fact this is all message board fodder and ultimately it only matters what the AD and president think it’s acceptable.
Seriously??
- Thread starter TheC
- Start date
Exactly. This pretty much sums it up. Including the fact this is all message board fodder and ultimately it only matters what the AD and president think it’s acceptable.
I want to think there are more Mike Woodsons out there. Who can come in and stop the predictable bleeding a coaching change produces. But truth is that is an exception and, like for Texas, for schools who can reload a lot easier in the transfer portal than we can.
*wink* Dennis Gates *wink*
I took this from your post on the Rock, PPD. I know it was just a passing statement, but I think you underplayed it.
The challenge is not just finding a coach who would actually want to come here and stay. NU has had that with BC and CC. It's also getting NU and the cheapass community to (probably) overpay if they want to attract an established coach. Remember, CC started at $1.4M, then they bumped him to $1.7M, then up to the B10 mid-range of $3M+.
For hypothetical example, Moser is starting at Oklahoma at $2.8M+ and ending at $4.5M. Oklahoma is established with a winning history and tournament bids 7 out of the last 9 years.
Let's say NU is a competitor for Moser last summer. I think you're crazy if you think Moser would have turned down Oklahoma for a similar salary. It would have taken more than $3-3.5M to drag Moser away from that. And I'm not sure starting a coach at $3.5-4M is in NU's DNA at all. There have been people bitching out here for years about Collins' very middle-of-the-road salary.
Oh, and then the coach actually has to do it on the court in the NU environment.
This isn't an argument for keeping CC. But finding THE guy at NU is easier typed on a message board than done. You're not going to get anyone in demand at market value.
All good points, but even if we didn't match Oklahoma's salary for Moser I think we would have been in contention because from all accounts he and his family enjoyed living in Chicago and they could have maintained all tlheir established community and family connections. They also had kids who attended local schools and moving across the country with kids is never easy. I could be wrong and maybe money was the most important thing he was chasing, but I think we would have had a real shot with him.
Unfortunately, I think he was the only "hot" coach who would have considered NU and I don't think there are any young up and coming coaches who will be in demand that will seriously consider NU at this point. You are right that it's not in NU's DNA to overpay for a coach. So assuming CC does "fine" this year (i.e., no 10 game losing streaks and he wins 6, 7, 8 BIG games) I think he's the guy for the forseeable future.
I don't know that at all. Coaches generally succeed because they have a style and approach to winning and they build a program that they recruit towards. The coach that can achieve success with any roster is rare. Matt Painter's style of play doesn't fit this roster. Tom Izzo's style of play doesn't fit this roster. So, I'm skeptical that they'd walk in mid-season here and all of the sudden this roster would be an NCAA contender. That's not to say that they couldn't be successful at NU. Depending on how you define success, I'm sure that they could. I am skeptical that either would have near the success at NU that they have had at their current locations though.
IMHO, that's one of the reasons Coach Collins has struggled some. He's not able to put together the kind of program that he was taught to build at Duke. There's a coach that can build a program that has long-term success at NU. I think everybody continue to hope that Chris Collins figures out how to be that guy because there have been inklings...they just feel faint and distant.
Last edited:
A characteristic of a good coach is adapting his "style" to the players that he has on the roster. I think Izzo is a good enough coach and a sharp enough basketball mind that he could make it work. And at this level, there still needs to be taching and motivation. Would we be a Final Four team with him at the helm? Nope. But I think we would see less meltdowns at the end of games and overall more "success"
I do agreee, however, that some of CC's struggles can be traced back to Duke. There's a reason I used Matt Painter as an example and not Coach K. When you have an overwhelming talent and athleticsim advantage over your opponent every single game, then your "coaching" and schemes becomes less relevant to the outcome. CC has had to learn how to coach with a physical and talent gap. Carmody had a plan for this (the slow it down back-cut heavy Princeton O). CC is still figuring it out.
I 100% agree that there are serious underlying issues at NU that changing a coach will not possibly solve. No question in my mind about it.
However, if the school does not want to do anything about, let’s say, admissions, does that give a coach a pass? Does he become untouchable? Most people probably agree that we’ve been more patient with BC or CC than most other places would be anyway.
Replacing a coach won’t fix our problems. But keeping one won’t either.
Are there coaches out there that can do better than CC and want to come to NU? For sure. Harder or easier to find, for 99% of schools, there is.
BC kind of was what the previous poster’s point wanted to illustrate: most coaches teach what they know well and feel comfortable with. For BC, what he knew well, happened to be a scheme that fit our talent deficit. And from that regard, it was a hire that made a lot of sense.
I do think the overwhelming majority of coaches do just that, teach and implement their way, regardless of fitting the roster. Not all, but most do. It’s a bit puzzling to me when, in soccer for example, coaches change playing styles all the time to fit the strengths of even one superstar.
So there it is. When looking for a coach, look for one who likes to play a brand of basketball that fits sub par athleticism. Think along the lines of Wisconsin. Or look for one who has show the ability to adapt. Otherwise you end up with CC, wanting to be Villanova, (to avoid more Duke references) at NU.
Izzo and Painter would instantly improve rebounding margin.
Well Painter (with absolute certainty) understands the advantage of size.
He recruited the 7'4" monster (Edey) for a reason.
Izzo would obviously win with our roster.
I would talk to Mark Turgeon. He worked his way up thru the ranks (no gifts, unlike Collins) and has been successful everywhere he has been.
Unless he is simply fed up with coaching, or has some skeletons in the closet that have yet to be disclosed.
If you don’t like my drivel, you are welcome to not read it. Won’t hurt my feelings at all.
Well, talk about putting words in mouths.. And not tired of standing my ground v anyone. Yes, I was solely put in timeout, yes, there was a reason and that is but one battle. I’m not done with it at all.
Now, I have to listen to people tell me who they are all the time. Rarely true. More likely who they want be. I judge based on what you do and say now. And you come off as a typical klique apologist. Is what it is. Do you can expect me to engage with you accordingly when you elect to begin a back and forth with me.
The herd is moving towards canning both guys sooner than later. Don’t like it, fight it. But it is not just me - the shouting is growing in both fronts. I’m in both camps.
You are still welcome to ignore me. I’m not a safe space. Not really interested in anyone’s feelings. Didn’t sign up for an emo board.
I’m not a whiskey fan. Vodka is my skinny drink, dark rum is my weakness. I expect there will be some in my weekend. Hopefully with some mix of cute, little companionship.
I said before, that once a vacancy exists, I would love to see any real candidate demand admission allowance as the one non-negotiable. Then as one after the next decline the NU offer since no allowance would be granted, the Pres, the AD and probably Ryan would be forced to sit down and discuss.
Either the Prez forces admissions onboard or the school is forced into a hire that will announce the end of any true attempt at fielding a competitive program.
I would hope the former. But either way, it ends the status quo of spending tens of millions on a program doomed for failure.
I guess it depends on your definition of an apologist. Yes, I favor retaining both PF and CCC at the moment. At the end of this season or next season I could very well feel differently. As you are aware, I felt we kept McCall too long and should have moved on from Jon after one year. A few other Assistants should clearly be on the hot seat. I am not adverse to change if it makes sense and is accompanied with some type of different strategy. Point is this apologist doesn’t support keeping the status quo and you know that. I just don’t align with BB being all CCC’s fault. I have been around long enough to remember getting excited because we dunked in a game. It is a long road to respectability when you have been bad for 70 years. That tells me it is more than Coaching since no Coach has ever solved the puzzle.
At the end of the day, it doesn’t matter to me what the herd thinks. It’s just an opinion, by both them and me.
Wouldn't you describe "respectable" as making it to the NIT 4 years in a row?
Carmody had us at that level in March of 2012.
The next year's team was completely decimated by injuries.
Then they fired Carmody.
I think when you write "respectability" you must mean "a consistent NCAA team."
Those are very different goals.
But it is just false to say we have been "bad for 70 years."
How? They'd suddenly have Zach Edey and Draymond Green? Their mere presence is going to change 18 or so years of muscle memory and training?
Casual but interested fan here. Can anyone tell me why Loyola can lose their Coach but find a worthy replacement right away and build on their recent success, while Northwestern keeps stepping on its poncho? Loyola is a very respectable school, and I’d think their players would meet NU’s admission criteria….
Well, for one they are better at coaching!
I'm going to go back to an old favorite...
They'd play Young and Nance together a lot.
And you know they'd have Matt Nicholson out there on occasion, dominating the glass against teams not named Michigan, Illinois and Purdue, making NU basketball entertaining again.
There’s 17 games left, I’m guessing I should be prepared for a 150-post thread rehashing the same shortcomings of the program after each loss from here on out?
I might be wrong here but it’s the optimist in me, I do still think Collins is a good coach. He’s raised the floor of NU’s teams and their ceiling. The issue is his teams have played closer to their floors. NU is still 1-2 players away from being a good B1G team. Nance and Buie are the only true “stars” on the team and the top half of the conference either has better or more “stars”. What is impressive to be is Collins has built the first B1G quality bench.
Now even if I thought we need a change and Collins needed to go. He’s proven himself capable enough. I don’t think you ever replace a coach like Collins or Carmody unless you have a clear replacement that you fully believe will change the direction of the team. Carmody was let go at the right time. It lead to an NCAA appearance. I don’t believe change for change sake. Especially with the depth Collins has recruited. This team has a solid and young depth so don’t rush a replacement. If the next great coach appears and we can get them go ahead and get them. NU is a hard place to win, recruit, and attract coaches.
This isn’t cuz I don’t want to win or lack desire. PSU was a sad performance because NU was the better team and lost the game. I just truly believe you don’t have changes for change sake. You have to have more of a plan than that with NU’s history.
Now even if I thought we need a change and Collins needed to go. He’s proven himself capable enough. I don’t think you ever replace a coach like Collins or Carmody unless you have a clear replacement that you fully believe will change the direction of the team. Carmody was let go at the right time. It lead to an NCAA appearance. I don’t believe change for change sake. Especially with the depth Collins has recruited. This team has a solid and young depth so don’t rush a replacement. If the next great coach appears and we can get them go ahead and get them. NU is a hard place to win, recruit, and attract coaches.
This isn’t cuz I don’t want to win or lack desire. PSU was a sad performance because NU was the better team and lost the game. I just truly believe you don’t have changes for change sake. You have to have more of a plan than that with NU’s history.
Fair point, but Loyola's OOC record this year is very good. And they have nothing close to NU's money & facilities. What else ya got?
I love what Loyola has done. And I hope they can keep doing it. But I’d not rush to conclude it’s in cruise control. College ball is full of coaches who did well for a year or two, while carrying the torch, just to fall flat after.
Bruce Weber or, more recent and obscure, Northern Kentucky as I was a season ticket holder there for 3 years.
As to why NU continues to disappoint, for me, it’s because we have not found the right guy. Harder to find than in other schools. But our expectations for what constitutes success are also very low. Couple of tourneys in a decade and we’d be happy.
maybe they have that winning record because of who they play. NU and Loyola admissions are not close to the same.
A few thoughts ...
1) I’d back up the truck for Mark Turgeon
2) I’d back up two trucks for Matt Painter. I think he’s EXACTLY what NU needs. He’s got a bit of a formula, he knows what he needs, and he’s been able to do it regularly with people in that top 200 space. He’s got a couple top 100s in his program, but the top 100s aren’t the players who dictate the direction of his teams
Someone mentioned Zach Edney. Not in the ESPN top 100. Not in the Rivals top 150.
Trevion Williams …. 50 spaces below Nance and Kopp in the Rivals 2018 list.
I don’t think you can say this about Izzo at all. His program has always been filled with top 100s since the days of Cleeves and Peterson.
3) Now I wonder if Williams and Edney make it into NU. KO is the only one who has spoken publicly about this. On his way out the door, he estimated 90% of the top 100 have no chance at NU.
4) Gato, the admissions issues don’t give a coach a complete pass. But it does give them some rope compared to other programs.
The one and maybe only value/advantage this program has is that a coach can come in here and have seven or eight years to get it together. You can raise a family here.
Most of us understand the challenges of this program. That means the coaches know at least as much if not more. It’s not as if they are dumb and live in a vacuum without a network.
If you start bouncing coaches after three or four years, then you’ll see even less interest.
5) I’m sorry but NU would be a very good MVC program. That would solve a lot of problems for getting into the tournament.
OTOH, NU has NEVER been as well coached as that Final Four Loyola team – not even close.
1) I’d back up the truck for Mark Turgeon
2) I’d back up two trucks for Matt Painter. I think he’s EXACTLY what NU needs. He’s got a bit of a formula, he knows what he needs, and he’s been able to do it regularly with people in that top 200 space. He’s got a couple top 100s in his program, but the top 100s aren’t the players who dictate the direction of his teams
Someone mentioned Zach Edney. Not in the ESPN top 100. Not in the Rivals top 150.
Trevion Williams …. 50 spaces below Nance and Kopp in the Rivals 2018 list.
I don’t think you can say this about Izzo at all. His program has always been filled with top 100s since the days of Cleeves and Peterson.
3) Now I wonder if Williams and Edney make it into NU. KO is the only one who has spoken publicly about this. On his way out the door, he estimated 90% of the top 100 have no chance at NU.
4) Gato, the admissions issues don’t give a coach a complete pass. But it does give them some rope compared to other programs.
The one and maybe only value/advantage this program has is that a coach can come in here and have seven or eight years to get it together. You can raise a family here.
Most of us understand the challenges of this program. That means the coaches know at least as much if not more. It’s not as if they are dumb and live in a vacuum without a network.
If you start bouncing coaches after three or four years, then you’ll see even less interest.
5) I’m sorry but NU would be a very good MVC program. That would solve a lot of problems for getting into the tournament.
OTOH, NU has NEVER been as well coached as that Final Four Loyola team – not even close.
I mean a team that is over 500 in the conference. NU has been over 500 in the B1G twice since 1960. So I will rephrase to say bad for 60 years.
It is extremely pessimistic to say that a team that finishes 8-10 in the Big Ten is a bad team.
No fricking way.
Ok, I am not sure what the quibble is here. Going down to your 8 standard, NU makes it 6 times in the last 60 years. 2 by the current head coach. That’s bad to me, but maybe your definition is different.
Well part of that is their coach had success and was hired by a bigger program. So they’re hiring to succeed a successful coach, not to replace a failed coach and reboot a program. Picking the right guy is important, but it’s definitely to a new coach’s advantage to have it already humming when he gets there. Even better if he was already on staff and benefits from continuity.
That's bad analysis and I've come to expect better from you. "Better at coaching" is meaningless. They are going to run completely different offensive sets. They use very different defensive principles. I'm skeptical that Young and Nance would even be good together in the sets that Izzo runs. The roster Northwestern has doesn't fit what either of those coaches do. Izzo and Painter could improve the results at Northwestern, but it would take implementing their program with the kind of players that run their systems well.
Are you really going to claim that NU would not have a better record this year if Izzo or Painter inherited the team in early November?
A good coach takes his personnel and figures out what works best.
Our roster has enough for either of those guys to win games.
If Izzo and Painter inherited the team in early November, I definitely would not say the team would have a better record. I'd say that the team might have a WORSE record.
I don't think either coach would have any time to implement what they do well if they were dropped into the team with games already starting, particularly in a season hamstrung by the pandemic. I know coaches struggling to implement things this season with kids who have already been in their program and were recruited for how they fit into it. Coaching isn't just flipping a switch with a bunch of robots.
Interesting.
I am certain that we'd have at least one more win, but probably 2 more wins.
Because coaching isnt just flipping a switch with a bunch of robots.
Good coaches win.
Bad coaches lose.
In general.
Loyola likely takes minimum academic qualifiers like nearly all D1 college programs. Having worked in college sports, I can tell you it's a HUGE difference than what NU allows for athlete admissions. Most of these kids are C students in high school with SAT scores < 1000.
Which means NU was and continues to be a bad team under CCC. So he was given his chance, didn’t happen - just like BC. Time to try something else.
Jim Calhoun turned down the NU job because he said, explicitly, that he could not win. Calhoun would have lost just like all of our other coaches. You just can’t compare coaches like this; it’s just not this black and white.
Similar threads
