• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Danny Manning Credibility Watch

Now wait a second, Kansas knew that was a chance with Roy. That’s the beauty of the Miller hire. Wake is his destination job. A 35 year old with his skills with Wake as a destination job is a once a generation opportunity.

We are not KU or UNC folks. Roy Williams ain’t walking through that door.

Get Ken to buy out Manning’s contract and put Wes in place. WIN WIN and were off. If it works, we have us something for a long long time. If not, what have we lost?
 
donaldross said:
Now wait a second, Kansas knew that was a chance with Roy. That’s the beauty of the Miller hire. Wake is his destination job. A 35 year old with his skills with Wake as a destination job is a once a generation opportunity.

We are not KU or UNC folks. Roy Williams ain’t walking through that door.

Get Ken to buy out Manning’s contract and put Wes in place. WIN WIN and were off. If it works, we have us something for a long long time. If not, what have we lost?
Click to expand...

Firing Danny now will solidify Wake as a coaching graveyard and trigger happy. three firings in 10 years would not be a good look.
 
donaldross said:
Now wait a second, Kansas knew that was a chance with Roy. That’s the beauty of the Miller hire. Wake is his destination job. A 35 year old with his skills with Wake as a destination job is a once a generation opportunity.

We are not KU or UNC folks. Roy Williams ain’t walking through that door.

Get Ken to buy out Manning’s contract and put Wes in place. WIN WIN and were off. If it works, we have us something for a long long time. If not, what have we lost?
Click to expand...

Three more years with a vastly unqualified headcoach.
 
Wait, do people really debate the Larranaga hiring for Miami? They made six tournament appearances before he was hired - two first round losses, a second round loss, and a sweet 16.

He started in 2011 - they've made four tournaments since then counting this year (his third straight), including two sweet 16s, and are regularly competitive in a stacked ACC.
 
Whether or not a coach would leave Wake in the event of wild success should not be part of our hiring criteria. Maybe a tiebreaker, but let's find the coach who is most likely to have the wild success.
 
Continuing to look like shit is a way worse look than firing an unsuccessful coach. The worst looking firing was Dino.
 
I get the desire to hire our own Coach K. The problem with that as a strategy is that in more cases than not it likely leads to a revolving door of shitty coaches, our AD is probably incapable of pulling it off, and our program probably isn’t in a state to pull it off.

If you trust Wellman to identify the next Wooden, K, Knight, Bennett, etc. AND convince him to come to Wake then you are more delusional than this board supposed me to be.

On a related note, is there a good example out there in the last 50 years of a coach in his 30s taking over a program after the 8 year stretch we’ve had and turning it into the type of program we want?

Bennett’s the closest example I can think of but he hasn’t quite reached that level yet, and the eight year run he followed wasn’t nearly as bad.
 
I don't think Danny Manning is a very good game coach. I think he is a fine representative of the school and a good to very good recruiter. I believe we could and should upgrade. That being said, we are going to be stuck with him for a while. Because:
- next year we have a great player coming in along with another very good player. We have Sarr and Moore back, along with Brown and Little Chill. Assuming Crawford stays and plays even close to the potential he has shown, that gives us enough talent to have a good year, even with mediocre coaching. We will be competitive, finish middle of the pack or higher in the ACC and make the big dance.
- the following year we either have enough talent coming back to again have a successful year or we have an exodus of kids and Manning has that excuse... so we keep him.
- somewhere in there ('19 or '20 class) we will sign another great recruit or two, giving us a reason to keep Manning again.
Without a major collapse or a controversy of some sort, I don't see us cutting ties with Manning for at least 2-4 more years. Most likely Wellman will retire first and the new AD may finally see the light and decide to go another direction.
 
RacerDeac said:
No one would care.
Click to expand...

It might not be prohibitive, but it will certainly be a factor. Presumably, any coach we are after will have several other suitors. A coach looking at Wellman’s track record over the last three coaches will almost certainly wonder WTF he was doing and whether this is a guy they want to work for.
 
scooter84 said:
I don't think Danny Manning is a very good game coach. I think he is a fine representative of the school and a good to very good recruiter. I believe we could and should upgrade. That being said, we are going to be stuck with him for a while. Because:
- next year we have a great player coming in along with another very good player. We have Sarr and Moore back, along with Brown and Little Chill. Assuming Crawford stays and plays even close to the potential he has shown, that gives us enough talent to have a good year, even with mediocre coaching. We will be competitive, finish middle of the pack or higher in the ACC and make the big dance.
- the following year we either have enough talent coming back to again have a successful year or we have an exodus of kids and Manning has that excuse... so we keep him.
- somewhere in there ('19 or '20 class) we will sign another great recruit or two, giving us a reason to keep Manning again.
Without a major collapse or a controversy of some sort, I don't see us cutting ties with Manning for at least 2-4 more years. Most likely Wellman will retire first and the new AD may finally see the light and decide to go another direction.
Click to expand...

Isn’t the bold exactly what we would want our new coach to do? Won’t we be in a vastly better position to hire our future legend with a new AD and several years of sustained success?

The bold basically describes exactly what I’ve been arguing for the past couple of months.
 
I’ve never understood this board’s obsession with how a coach achieves certain results rather than the results themselves.

Manning could go 21-11 next year, get a 6 seed and go to round 2, follow it up with another 20 win season and a sweet sixteen berth, and land two more top 25 recruits, but if it’s because Hoard and Chaundee show out and not because of Manning’s in game coaching y’all will still declare him a failure and argue that we should have fired him after year 4.
 
RChildress107 said:
I’ve never understood this board’s obsession with how a coach achieves certain results rather than the results themselves.

Manning could go 21-11 next year, get a 6 seed and go to round 2, follow it up with another 20 win season and a sweet sixteen berth, and land two more top 25 recruits, but if it’s because Hoard and Chaundee show out and not because of Manning’s in game coaching y’all will still declare him a failure and argue that we should have fired him after year 4.
Click to expand...
You're the king of straw mans.
 
RChildress107 said:
I’ve never understood this board’s obsession with how a coach achieves certain results rather than the results themselves.

Manning could go 21-11 next year, get a 6 seed and go to round 2, follow it up with another 20 win season and a sweet sixteen berth, and land two more top 25 recruits, but if it’s because Hoard and Chaundee show out and not because of Manning’s in game coaching y’all will still declare him a failure and argue that we should have fired him after year 4.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand the board's position (to the extent there is a consensus position, which there probably isn't). If we go 21-11 next year as you say and, by all accounts and all appearances, those results are consistent with the talent and potential of the team, I think people will generally be satisfied. The problem will be if we go 21-11 but it is apparent that we had the potential for much more - if we continue to blow leads late due to questionable strategy and game management - if the team continues to display little effort toward or understanding of defense, etc. etc. People would have been much less upset with this year's results if it wasn't pretty obvious that we had the potential for a much better year.

So when my prediction talks about successful years because of talent on board, the assumption I am making is that those years would have been more successful with a better coach leading that same talent.
 
scooter84 said:
I don't think you understand the board's position (to the extent there is a consensus position, which there probably isn't). If we go 21-11 next year as you say and, by all accounts and all appearances, those results are consistent with the talent and potential of the team, I think people will generally be satisfied. The problem will be if we go 21-11 but it is apparent that we had the potential for much more - if we continue to blow leads late due to questionable strategy and game management - if the team continues to display little effort toward or understanding of defense, etc. etc. People would have been much less upset with this year's results if it wasn't pretty obvious that we had the potential for a much better year.

So when my prediction talks about successful years because of talent on board, the assumption I am making is that those years would have been more successful with a better coach leading that same talent.
Click to expand...

I think I understand the consensus position pretty clearly. Again I don’t understand the obsessions with means vs ends.
 
RChildress107 said:
I get the desire to hire our own Coach K. The problem with that as a strategy is that in more cases than not it likely leads to a revolving door of shitty coaches, our AD is probably incapable of pulling it off, and our program probably isn’t in a state to pull it off.

If you trust Wellman to identify the next Wooden, K, Knight, Bennett, etc. AND convince him to come to Wake then you are more delusional than this board supposed me to be.

On a related note, is there a good example out there in the last 50 years of a coach in his 30s taking over a program after the 8 year stretch we’ve had and turning it into the type of program we want?

Bennett’s the closest example I can think of but he hasn’t quite reached that level yet, and the eight year run he followed wasn’t nearly as bad.
Click to expand...

UVA currently isn’t the type of program that we would want?
 
Deaconblue said:
Firing Danny now will solidify Wake as a coaching graveyard and trigger happy. three firings in 10 years would not be a good look.
Click to expand...

This kind of thinking is why Wake sucks at basketball.

If you expect success, you demand it. It you want failure, all you have to do is allow it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top