Jump to content

formermav43

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    3478
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by formermav43

  1. While true to a point, there’s a reason 3 year contracts aren’t standard. You’re immediately handicapping him in recruiting because it signals your coach may not even be there the entire time you are. There’s no reason not to give him 4-5 years if you hire him. If it’s clear he wouldn’t work out after 3, just pay the buyout.
  2. It can be. I don't think of that as "old" in general with people I know, I'm just thinking more in terms of what is ideally a long-term hire if he does well - so given when most coaches retire, you might be looking at 15-20 years of Donovan, but maybe only a decade of someone Dutcher's age. If you're thinking is right about it maybe being inevitable, are comfortable with a shorter-term solution, and want someone with an even better resume, why not kick the tires on John Beilein?
  3. I don't have anything against hiring an older coach in general. But 1) there's a big difference between a guy like Dutcher and Billy Donovan/Jay Wright; and 2) I'd say that 5 years could make a bigger difference than it seems like in a vacuum in that age bracket too.
  4. He turns 64 later this year. I'm sure we'd prefer to hire someone younger if possible.
  5. It balances the ones who want him hired for simply not completely screwing things up in 3 months.
  6. Should it carry that much weight? I remember Paul Boyette fighting back tears in defense of Charlie Strong.
  7. Agree. I’d go further-I don’t eat Tabasco at all. It’s not good.
  8. It seems like that should resolve itself pretty naturally with guys leaving.
  9. I’d argue that these are actually 2 slightly different questions you’re asking-“earning the job” vs. CDC “offering him the job.” One relates to his actual merits, the other is more about when the pressure becomes such that you can’t avoid hiring him *even if you feel he hasn’t earned it*.
  10. He’s still gonna do football too.
  11. He announced it in the fall. He’s not retiring from broadcasting in general, just from the tournament.
  12. I think he went in looking for a fight. It’s pretty shocking that a federal judge handled himself so poorly (though, as the tweet in the op suggested, that was probably the point). Otoh, the dean seems to be reading from prepared remarks at times-it looks like she went in intending to say her piece too. Basically, no one comes out looking particularly good from the whole fiasco. It’s probably why Stanford already issued that apology.
  13. Yeah, I dont buy that there’s only two options here. I want the team to win every game, and I want CDC to make the best hire possible. If he thinks that’s Terry, then so be it. I think it’s probably not, and I don’t believe he’ll just cave to pressure because of a couple of tournament wins. We’ll see.
  14. Ah yes, shinshi shinshi. Most lovers refuse on the grounds that it's unclean.
  15. We’re not hiring Dixon, and we shouldn’t. But compare their resumes, and Dixon is absolutely a step up from Terry. (Which is another indication of how considering Terry is absurd, but I digress.)
  16. You can win a World Series and be pushed out as GM too, as you should know. Didn’t seem to deter good candidates for that job.
  17. Those are two different jobs. Every sport has numerous examples of excellent assistants who were mediocrities (or worse) as head coaches.
  18. Pshaw. Look at the Astros winning it all and moving on from their GM. Embrace the hate.
  19. To be clear, no, that’s not the rule. I believe it’s just that 1) all 4 infielders have to have their feet in the dirt (which is now standardized in size at every park) and 2) 2 on each side of 2nd. They’re often lining up against lefties the way Huck described. Someone lined up against Joey Gallo with the LF in shallow RF, in fact. That wedge is something that’s been talked about, maybe even experimented with at some level in the minors.
  20. I agree with Dana. Look at the Astros model, and then look at the teams who routinely give out decade long deals, and tell me again why they “have” to do something.
  21. Then why did you bring it up? The whole tangent didn’t belong in this thread.
  22. “Essentially” is doing a lot of work in that statement. I mean, I think most observers would argue they were “essentially broken” just based on watching him try to catch.
×
×
  • Create New...