• 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!

Possible Wake Forest Coaching Candidates Analysis

wsc8521s said:
It's a horrible argument. I think coaches are smart enough and believe in their abilities enough that they know that they won't struggle to the same degree that two truly bad college head coaches have.

I see no reason why Wake can't be at the very least on the level of a Miami under Larranaga, making the tourney almost every year and threatening to go deep occasionally (know they're struggling this year). The coach matters a helluva lot in college hoop
Click to expand...

OK, hope to see all sorts of high profile coaches fighting for the WF job.
 
IAppreciateIt said:
THE APPETITE OFFICIAL LIST OF 10

1. Nate Oats
2. Craig Smith
3. Thad Matta
4. Mike Rhoades
5. Bob Richey
6. Ritchie McKay
7. Tommy Amaker
8. Earl Grant
9. Wes Miller
10. Anthony Grant
Click to expand...

apetit on the John Groce redemption tour
 
Pilchard said:
OK, hope to see all sorts of high profile coaches fighting for the WF job.
Click to expand...


Yeah we're going to have to overspend on an up and comer to have a chance at a decent coach. No coach with a decent resume will come to Wake. A huge rebuild to still be a middle tier ACC team. Plus we have a habit of ending head coaching careers. That's the bad news. The good news is if we ever land an up and comer who is wildly successful at Wake, he's likely to stay. Our bball program just isn't a stepping stone spot. Too close to the top, but not close enough to get someone holding out for a blue school. So let's just throw money at coaches with some promise (real promise, not like DM) with short term contracts until we find one that sticks.
 
Pilchard said:
OK, hope to see all sorts of high profile coaches fighting for the WF job.
Click to expand...

You said you could make the argument it's a bottom 25 job among major conference jobs. I'm not saying we'll get the creme-de-la-creme, but that we can make a hire that is reflective of the program's ability -- when run somewhat competently -- to regularly make the NCAA Tournament.

And if Goodman's report is even close to right then it doesn't seem like money is a huge problem. I mean Shah is dropping cash left and right
 
Turd Ferguson said:
Yeah we're going to have to overspend on an up and comer to have a chance at a decent coach. No coach with a decent resume will come to Wake. A huge rebuild to still be a middle tier ACC team. Plus we have a habit of ending head coaching careers. That's the bad news. The good news is if we ever land an up and comer who is wildly successful at Wake, he's likely to stay. Our bball program just isn't a stepping stone spot. Too close to the top, but not close enough to get someone holding out for a blue school. So let's just throw money at coaches with some promise (real promise, not like DM) with short term contracts until we find one that sticks.
Click to expand...

I think we could be a middle tier team next year IF we keep the players we have and get a half decent coach.
 
Howland took the Miss State job off three straight sub-15 win seasons.

Of course $$ and contract length talk
 
At this point the buyout doesnt matter, Manning is gone at the end of the year regardless.
 
bigboy8 said:
At this point the buyout doesnt matter, Manning is gone at the end of the year regardless.
Click to expand...

The size of the buyout matters only with respect to any impact it has on the ability to pay the next coach.
 
I meant it wont affect whether Manning is fired or not, it could affect the coaching hire though but it likely wont matter as big donors will pay the buyout.
 
bigboy8 said:
I meant it wont affect whether Manning is fired or not, it could affect the coaching hire though but it likely wont matter as big donors will pay the buyout.
Click to expand...
I think you overestimate the ability or desire of "big donors" to stroke an $18 million check just to make a coach go away.
 
I never understand how often big contract extensions are made without logic, in so many sports. Every year you hear people questioning why certain athletes or coaches were extended, how an athletes contract is an albatross, etc. Yet the powers that be keep granting it. Including Wellman apparently.

On an unrelated note, no one is listening to our broadcasts so I’m not sure it matters what the announcers say.
 
RacerDeac said:
I think you overestimate the ability or desire of "big donors" to stroke an $18 million check just to make a coach go away.
Click to expand...

Also, why is it big donors will pay horseshit buyouts but we can't pay a real coach real money?
 
Who was it that talked us all in to John Groce a few years back?
 
Had they paid the extra 1m per year at any point in the last 10 they would not be paying 3 buyouts, attendance/interest would have been far better during that time. Pretty sure winning pays for itself.
 
DeacDaddy said:
I never understand how often big contract extensions are made without logic, in so many sports. Every year you hear people questioning why certain athletes or coaches were extended, how an athletes contract is an albatross, etc. Yet the powers that be keep granting it. Including Wellman apparently.

On an unrelated note, no one is listening to our broadcasts so I’m not sure it matters what the announcers say.
Click to expand...

With pro athletes, every team has to spend a certain amount of money on a set number of players. Somebody is bound to get overpaid. That’s just math.

As far as college coaches, ADs, big donors, and fans get really attached to a coach. There’s some psychological term for overvaluing something once it’s yours. Can’t remember right off hand. And they’re really worried about other people taking their coach. And they don’t have to worry about paying players so they just overpay coaches and give them ridiculous contracts. They’re probably also the type of people who are overvalued and overpaid executives in their personal lives as well.
 
deaconson said:
Had they paid the extra 1m per year at any point in the last 10 they would not be paying 3 buyouts, attendance/interest would have been far better during that time. Pretty sure winning pays for itself.
Click to expand...
I've made this point in the past. We've lost more money by not paying a coach than we've saved. We could have been paying $5 million a year and still come out on top if we were consistently in the Top 20.
 
RacerDeac said:
I've made this point in the past. We've lost more money by not paying a coach than we've saved. We could have been paying $5 million a year and still come out on top if we were consistently in the Top 20.
Click to expand...

Technically we don't even have to be in the Top 20 to come out on top.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top