• 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!

Tommy Amaker

Amaker had his shot at the big time. Tough situation at Michigan? Yes. But still underwhelming. His years at Hahvahd are beneath succeeding at a mid-major IMO. Give me Miller instead. Amaker is the boring, safe hire that Wellman likes to make that will keep us on the ACC bubble for years to come. Yes, Miller has had limited years to prove himself, but what has Amaker "proven"?

All this is moot as we are hiring Shaka. But if we don't hire him or Howland, give me a Miller over Amaker please.
 
I can see people preferring Miller or White to Amaker, because they're fresh names, but Amaker has taken HARVARD and made them into a top 35 team that can go toe-to-toe with the big boys. He was not a great success at Michigan at a weird time for Michigan basketball and under unusual circumstances, and even then he won the NIT and made the finals of another (we scoff at the NIT of course, but winning the damn thing is still an accomplishment). At age 31 (younger than Miller, younger than White), he did what Miller just did and took Seton Hall to a Sweet 16, in addition to recruiting a top-5 recruiting class.

I get that he's not a new name, and he's not my first choice either, but I do think he could be very successful at Wake and comparing him to [Redacted] (who had never won anything anywhere or recruited anyone) is totally ignorant hyperbole. IMO, a lot of factors go into whether a coach is successful in a particular situation -- the coach's personality and skills, the status of the program, the culture of the university, even just luck in terms of local HS talent. Things obviously have come together for Amaker at Harvard, and I suspect there's a good chance they would also come together for him at Wake if he's hired.
 
Say Hey Deac said:
I can see people preferring Miller or White to Amaker, because they're fresh names, but Amaker has taken HARVARD and made them into a top 35 team that can go toe-to-toe with the big boys. He was not a great success at Michigan at a weird time for Michigan basketball and under unusual circumstances, and even then he won the NIT and made the finals of another (we scoff at the NIT of course, but winning the damn thing is still an accomplishment). At age 31 (younger than Miller, younger than White), he did what Miller just did and took Seton Hall to a Sweet 16, in addition to recruiting a top-5 recruiting class.

I get that he's not a new name, and he's not my first choice either, but I do think he could be very successful at Wake and comparing him to [Redacted] (who had never won anything anywhere or recruited anyone) is totally ignorant hyperbole. IMO, a lot of factors go into whether a coach is successful in a particular situation -- the coach's personality and skills, the status of the program, the culture of the university, even just luck in terms of local HS talent. Things obviously have come together for Amaker at Harvard, and I suspect there's a good chance they would also come together for him at Wake if he's hired.
Click to expand...

This. He would not be my first choice either, but he could be very successful at Wake.

In some ways, you can draw some parallels between Clawson and Amaker--both started as head coaches at a young age and have gone through their bumps (and clearly have learned a lot from these challenges).
 
Clawson had one bad season as a coordinator. Amaker could not make the tournament in six years at Michigan. That is unbelievable. Even with probation.

And are we seriously celebrating an NIT championship an reaching the finals of the NIT? As Virginia Tech hires a perrienal winner from Marquette, we will hire a guy who a total of what, three NCAA wins in fifteen years of coaching? Talk about LOWF. Plus, if the school is attempting to unify he fan base by hiring someone that everyone can get behind, this is not the hire in my opinion.
 
Amaker's wife is attractive. He also never wears a tie which might have some good mojo.
 
Say Hey Deac said:
I can see people preferring Miller or White to Amaker, because they're fresh names, but Amaker has taken HARVARD and made them into a top 35 team that can go toe-to-toe with the big boys. He was not a great success at Michigan at a weird time for Michigan basketball and under unusual circumstances, and even then he won the NIT and made the finals of another (we scoff at the NIT of course, but winning the damn thing is still an accomplishment). At age 31 (younger than Miller, younger than White), he did what Miller just did and took Seton Hall to a Sweet 16, in addition to recruiting a top-5 recruiting class.

I get that he's not a new name, and he's not my first choice either, but I do think he could be very successful at Wake and comparing him to [Redacted] (who had never won anything anywhere or recruited anyone) is totally ignorant hyperbole. IMO, a lot of factors go into whether a coach is successful in a particular situation -- the coach's personality and skills, the status of the program, the culture of the university, even just luck in terms of local HS talent. Things obviously have come together for Amaker at Harvard, and I suspect there's a good chance they would also come together for him at Wake if he's hired.
Click to expand...

That is in no way comparable. Amaker took over a team that only a few years before had been to the National Championship Game. They had also won multiple Big East championships, at the time the best conference in the country. That is in no way similar to Dayton. Amaker was handed the keys to a Ferrari not once but twice, and totaled it both times.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
That is in no way comparable. Amaker took over a team that only a few years before had been to the National Championship Game. They had also won multiple Big East championships, at the time the best conference in the country. That is in no way similar to Dayton. Amaker was handed the keys to a Ferrari not once but twice, and totaled it both times.
Click to expand...

Pete Carrol says hello from frigid New England. Sometimes it just doesn't work out.
 
Agreed, Dayton won one NCAA tournament game in the 20+ years prior to Archie. Seton Hall was a factor in the big east when Amaker got the job with lots of recent tournament success. So I think it is a bit different.
 
Lectro said:
Pete Carrol says hello from frigid New England. Sometimes it just doesn't work out.
Click to expand...

Pete Carrol won the division and took his team to the playoffs 3 out of 4 years (I think) in New England. Hardly totaling.
 
Turd Ferguson said:
Amaker had his shot at the big time. Tough situation at Michigan? Yes. But still underwhelming. His years at Hahvahd are beneath succeeding at a mid-major IMO. Give me Miller instead. Amaker is the boring, safe hire that Wellman likes to make that will keep us on the ACC bubble for years to come. Yes, Miller has had limited years to prove himself, but what has Amaker "proven"?

All this is moot as we are hiring Shaka. But if we don't hire him or Howland, give me a Miller over Amaker please.
Click to expand...

I don't really see how his time at Harvard is beneath succeeding at a mid-major. The one perk he does have is that if he has the best team in the Ivy League, he will get a shot at dancing, but that doesn't change the fact that Harvard hadn't won a tournament game in 66 years before last year and now they've won two games.

It's probably harder to succeed at Harvard than "random mid-major university here." I guess by that same token though, with a name like Amaker and a school brand like Harvard, it can't be too hard to get some good recruits to Cambridge.
 
2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
Amaker was handed the keys to a Ferrari not once but twice, and totaled it both times.
Click to expand...

Again, not sure why the hyperbole is necessary when you can make your point without it. A Ferrari? Are you kidding? Seton Hall hadn't been to the NCAAT in 4 years when he got the job and it had been 10 since it made the Final 4. They were coming off 12-16 and 10-18 years when Amaker got that job. And if "totalling the Ferrari" is 4 postseason appearances in 4 years, including a Sweet 16 and a top 2 recruiting class, okay. Likewise, Michigan was on probation, hadn't made the NCAAT in 4 years, and was coming off a 10-18 season.
 
Not sure if posted yet:

1. Tommy Amaker has taken a seat at the table with Shaka Smart, Gregg Marshall and Steve Fisher.

Those three guys are all coaches who have been able to build national programs outside of a BCS conference, and Amaker has now done the same thing at Harvard. The Crimson have won games in the NCAA Tournament in back-to-back seasons and took Michigan State to the wire Saturday night before falling by seven. Amaker shouldn't even think about considering another job unless Mike Krzyzewski decides to retire a few years earlier than all of us expect him to. Why is that exactly? Harvard is going to get players. Harvard is going to keep making the NCAA Tournament. Harvard is going to be nationally relevant as long as Amaker is the face of its program. Is it worth leaving all that to take over a struggling BCS program just to say that you're coaching in the ACC or Big Ten? I didn't think so, either.

Link
 
My guess is Amaker would be an above-average recruiter at Wake. Something on a level near or above Coach Prosser. I'm not super impressed by his offensive sets and execution, however.


I'd take Miller over him, and probably White. Given my relatively well-known thoughts about Howland, I'd take Amaker over him.

Smart
Jay wright pipe dream
Marshall
Miller
White
Amaker
Oh shit, we have to take Howland.
 
Listen, BC just fired Donahue, who they hired because he did essentially the same exact thing as Amaker. Take a bunch of Ivy League kids and get them to jump a major conference team in the NCAA tournament to win a game or two. It is a fun story, but it is not a novelty any more. Amaker has done it, Donahue did it, and Pete Carrill did it multiple times before that. And nobody from those staffs has made a successful transition to a major conference school. Winning a game or two in a one-and-done scenario and being successful over the course of an entire season are two completely different things. And in Amaker's case, we have specific evidence of him failing at two major conference schools. I'm sorry, but getting an Ivy League team to beat Cincinnati in this day and age is not the reason why a guy should get an ACC job after having two prior major conference opportunities.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top