2017 Coaching Carousel

[mattcoldagelli]

I don't know why people want to settle for Plan D just to get rid of the current guy.

Because the current guy is the worst coach in the B1G, and the Plan D guy would be way better than that.

 

[mattcoldagelli]

If you don't have the right hire, and you let Groce stay another year and this class comes in and is even close to what is advertised, the job is more attractive for the next guy coming in if you have to pull the trigger.

I am being 100% earnest when I ask you to walk me through the bolded scenario as if I were a two-year old.

If Groce stays, and the next class comes in, makes an impact, and we have a better year than this year (which I take is what you mean by "as advertised"), then Groce stays again - we don't fire him at that point because our job is "more attractive."

Are you honestly suggesting that we will improve next year (i.e., making the job more attractive) and then fire Groce for better results than this year? That makes no sense.

 

[LurkLongandProsper]

Problem with that thought is that you "admittedly caught lightning in a bottle" with Lovie. If you don't have that typeo of home run hire, then where are you? If you have a home run hire, and you want to pull the trigger, fine. Personally, none of the names quoted on this site are home run hires or realistic options, in my opinion. That being said, hiring a middle of the road guy does nothing for Illinois. If anything it solidifies your brand as mediocre. If you don't have the right hire, and you let Groce stay another year and this class comes in and is even close to what is advertised, the job is more attractive for the next guy coming in if you have to pull the trigger. And if it is worse, then you are able to do a total rebuild next year and not wait the obligatory 3-5 years to fire the "middle of the road guy" you have indicated would be acceptable. Whitman must get this one right. If he is not sure, he should hold his powder until he is.
]

Why do we have to kick the can a year just to see if we fail again before doing a total rebuild, exactly? Because by then we'd have nuked all fan support and they won't be overly hostile towards a slow start or something? We can drop Groce in 2 weeks, get a new guy, and start the rebuild in 2017.

 

[RML]

He doesn't understand there is no "one more year" option. We've all tried explaining that choosing to not move on from Groce IS another long term commitment because he will have to be extended to be able to recruit. I give up.

I might be in VAIllini's camp. The explanations that I've seen for why you "have to" extend seem to be 1) that's the way it's done, and 2) it would kill recruiting. I'm not pursuaded that recruits know or care, and naturally bristle when people tell me that something has to be done a certain way because that's what people do.
If we think we've got a good line on Hoiberg, but he's waiting to see what the Bulls do at the end of the season, then--if the end of the season goes well for the Illini-- I might not be bothered if there is no "fire" decision until after the NBA season.

 

[Alfonz24]

 

[WesterveltVictoryCigar]

He doesn't understand there is no "one more year" option. We've all tried explaining that choosing to not move on from Groce IS another long term commitment because he will have to be extended to be able to recruit. I give up.

Well, I think you do extend him but I don't think that locks you in "long term". You can probably re-work the contract to reduce the buyout since Groce wouldn't have any leverage to reject that.

 

[Ga65]

Inside info- Groce:lie::lie::lie::lie: takes Mizzu job and takes the recruiting class with him.

 

[OrangeAndBlues]

I might be in VAIllini's camp. The explanations that I've seen for why you "have to" extend seem to be 1) that's the way it's done, and 2) it would kill recruiting. I'm not pursuaded that recruits know or care, and naturally bristle when people tell me that something has to be done a certain way because that's what people do.
If we think we've got a good line on Hoiberg, but he's waiting to see what the Bulls do at the end of the season, then--if the end of the season goes well for the Illini-- I might not be bothered if there is no "fire" decision until after the NBA season.

Recruits do care. Everyone knows what it means: the coach is about to be let go. Why would you commit to a guy you know is about to get canned when you have other options?

 

[mattcoldagelli]

I might be in VAIllini's camp. The explanations that I've seen for why you "have to" extend seem to be 1) that's the way it's done, and 2) it would kill recruiting. I'm not pursuaded that recruits know or care, and naturally bristle when people tell me that something has to be done a certain way because that's what people do.

My argument has nothing to do with extensions or recruiting - it is addressing this wholly imagined scenario where if we wait, we will somehow have access to better candidates.

Either Groce will improve upon this year's results and we won't be making a hire at all, or he'll fail again and our job will be even less appealing.

So if you're okay with waiting "one more year" then you had better be okay with 1) possibly waiting 2-3 more years and also 2) thinking that someone who we can't currently get will be gettable after another year of no tourney and another season of fan apathy.

 

[OrangeAndBlues]

Well, I think you do extend him but I don't think that locks you in "long term". You can probably re-work the contract to reduce the buyout since Groce wouldn't have any leverage to reject that.

But that's money (albeit maybe not a lot) that could be used for something, anything else. I know you're on the same side as me on this so I'm not going to argue the point. His scenario just flat out makes no sense.

 

[WesterveltVictoryCigar]

But that's money (albeit maybe not a lot) that could be used for something, anything else. I know you're on the same side as me on this so I'm not going to argue the point. His scenario just flat out makes no sense.

Oh, I agree. I've mentioned that $500K bonus due in April that you have to add in as well. It's going to be expensive on several levels to wait another year.

 

[89illinigrad]

My argument has nothing to do with extensions or recruiting - it is addressing this wholly imagined scenario where if we wait, we will somehow have access to better candidates.

Either Groce will improve upon this year's results and we won't be making a hire at all, or he'll fail again and our job will be even less appealing.

So if you're okay with waiting "one more year" then you had better be okay with 1) possibly waiting 2-3 more years and also 2) thinking that someone who we can't currently get will be gettable after another year of no tourney and another season of fan apathy.

Its really not that hard to envision a scenario where a candidate that Groce wants will not be available until next year.

One example is Hoiberg wanting to wait until after the NBA season to make a change.

Another possibility is say Monty Williams wants to wait another year, while his kids adjust to life without their mom, before uprooting them and taking a new job.

If JW is already putting out feelers and getting advice from Colangelo (and others), he may already have his ideal candidate in mind. But, if that candidate is not going to be available at the end of this season, does he fire Groce and hire a "temp" until his candidate is available next year?

BTW, I'm not saying that is going to happen or its even likely, just that there might be factors we do not know of that could lead JW to consider keeping Groce for another year.

 

[Obelix]

They do make sense. I'd rather keep Groce and take an additional year to line up the coach we think can carry us forward, than hire in plan D or E and be right back where we are now in 3 years. How does THAT make sense?

I have seen this argument over and over again from many people, that we can line up the next coach before we fire Groce. Truth is that until you fire a coach and start negotiating, you do not know who the new coach will be. If that was the case, why wouldn't every school do that? Especially schools with more resources and connections and larger network?

Whitman seems like a young promising AD, but he is no 007 with a magic wand. We portray Illinois as the only smart school whereas everyone else is dumb. We always have a secret weapon. A few months ago it was Fletch, our secret weapon who was going to transform this team into kings of strength and athleticism. Now it is Whitman, who will outsmart everyone and secure a homerun coach behind everyone's back before he even fires Groce.

Whitman is young enough and smart enough to want to have a long career as an AD. He knows that you do not burn bridges in this profession.

 

[89illinigrad]

I have seen this argument over and over again from many people, that we can line up the next coach before we fire Groce. Truth is that until you fire a coach and start negotiating, you do not know who the new coach will be. If that was the case, why wouldn't every school do that? Especially schools with more resources and connections and larger network?

Whitman seems like a young promising AD, but he is no 007 with a magic wand. We portray Illinois as the only smart school whereas everyone else is dumb. We always have a secret weapon. A few months ago it was Fletch, our secret weapon who was going to transform this team into kings of strength and athleticism. Now it is Whitman, who will outsmart everyone and secure a homerun coach behind everyone's back before he even fires Groce.

Whitman is young enough and smart enough to want to have a long career as an AD. He knows that you do not burn bridges in this profession.

Well, maybe people have that impression of JW because that is exactly what he did on the football side.

Sent from my MotoE2(4G-LTE) using Tapatalk

 

[Obelix]

Well, maybe people have that impression of JW because that is exactly what he did on the football side.

And as I have said many times, that was an opportunistic hire, i.e., a coach without a job. Unless he constantly plans to do so, almost every name mentioned currently has a job.

 

[Calvin]

I might be in VAIllini's camp. The explanations that I've seen for why you "have to" extend seem to be 1) that's the way it's done, and 2) it would kill recruiting. I'm not pursuaded that recruits know or care, and naturally bristle when people tell me that something has to be done a certain way because that's what people do.

It matters to the recruits who matter. And if you're willing to give up any edge in recruiting, you don't know how important recruiting is.

I think in Groce's case, it would be particularly rough. Everyone is speculating he's gone, or at least on a seat so hot it's on fire. Couple that with letting his contract run down, and it's certain to weigh against Illinois in recruiting battles.

 

[IlliniOllie]

He doesn't understand there is no "one more year" option. We've all tried explaining that choosing to not move on from Groce IS another long term commitment because he will have to be extended to be able to recruit. I give up.

Also, we already did the "one more year" option. It was this year, and it failed. It's time to move on.

 

[rdillini]

Who are all these homerun hires that we can't get this year but can next year? These arguments are ridiculous.

If Groce somehow stays another year, without an extension, recruiting dies. Everyone knows he won't be there in a year. Sure you might keep your 17 class. You are almost guaranteed to lose at least 1-2 transfers. Your rebuild is starting next year with so many seniors gone this year.

Keeping Groce guarantees that Whitman got this one wrong.

The kids who transfer, likely will whether he stays or goes. You ask who are all the home run hires we cant get, I said, if you get one, pull the trigger. If you dont get one, then you dont pull the trigger. I am not making a judgment on who is a homerun hire and who isnt. I was responding to the premise that it would be okay to take a middle of the road guy instead of sticking with Groce. If anything, that is kicking the can down the road, because you are settling again for womeone who is not your first choice. And for the argument about not being able to negotiate with a coach until their season is done, while technically correct, discussions with agents through back channels goes on all the time. You can basically know if a deal can be done and if it will be done before ever meeting with someone.

 

[89illinigrad]

And as I have said many times, that was an opportunistic hire, i.e., a coach without a job. Unless he constantly plans to do so, almost every name mentioned currently has a job.

While it might not be kosher to go after a guy who is currently coaching, what's to stop JW from going after someone who is not currently a head coach, such as Monty or even Bilas.

Everyone here keeps trying to put this situation in a box whereas JW may be thinking outside the box. Like he has already done twice now with our FB and VB hires.

No one knows what JW is going to do and making definitive statements that he is going to do this or that or he won't do something because it's never been done before is all just pure guesses and nothing more. Trying to portray it as fact doesn't change anything. It's still just speculation, just like the people who are trying to speculate that there might be a scenario where Groce is still here next year.

Sent from my MotoE2(4G-LTE) using Tapatalk

 

[mattcoldagelli]

I am not making a judgment on who is a homerun hire and who isnt.

In all honesty, you should start getting specific about how these scenarios play out, because without actual candidates this just sounds like baseless, magical thinking.

 

[LurkLongandProsper]

While it might not be kosher to go after a guy who is currently coaching, what's to stop JW from going after someone who is not currently a head coach, such as Monty or even Bilas.

Everyone here keeps trying to put this situation in a box whereas JW may be thinking outside the box. Like he has already done twice now with our FB and VB hires.

No one knows what JW is going to do and making definitive statements that he is going to do this or that or he won't do something because it's never been done before is all just pure guesses and nothing more. Trying to portray it as fact doesn't change anything. It's still just speculation, just like the people who are trying to speculate that there might be a scenario where Groce is still here next year.

Sent from my MotoE2(4G-LTE) using Tapatalk

Hiring an assistant from a top program in the country, as he did with volleyball, is not out of the box thinking. It's not what some people expected because they put his hiring into the Lovie mold and Tamas isn't that, but it was not an out of the box hire.

The kids who transfer, likely will whether he stays or goes. You ask who are all the home run hires we cant get, I said, if you get one, pull the trigger. If you dont get one, then you dont pull the trigger. I am not making a judgment on who is a homerun hire and who isnt. I was responding to the premise that it would be okay to take a middle of the road guy instead of sticking with Groce. If anything, that is kicking the can down the road, because you are settling again for womeone who is not your first choice. And for the argument about not being able to negotiate with a coach until their season is done, while technically correct, discussions with agents through back channels goes on all the time. You can basically know if a deal can be done and if it will be done before ever meeting with someone.

In all honesty, you should start getting specific about how these scenarios play out, because without actual candidates this just sounds like baseless, magical thinking.

Agreed with matt here.

Also, hiring a new candidate who may be a plan B/C guy is not kicking the can down the road compared to retaining Groce. That's just bogus logic. Groce is already known to be a failure at this level of coaching. It's as simple as that. Trying to hire a new coach who may be more of a risk is not kicking the can, retaining a coach who we know isn't cutting it is the only scenario that is kicking the can. Everyone here is assuming that a Plan B or C guy can't be better or great in this role. The reality, as others have mentioned, is even all the Plan As from the last cycle (Shaka!) wouldn't have generated the results we want. It's not an exact science, folks -- great resumes in one situation may not equate to equal or better results at a different situation. But retaining Groce is not going to do anything to move us in the right direction.

 

[rdillini]

In all honesty, you should start getting specific about how these scenarios play out, because without actual candidates this just sounds like baseless, magical thinking.

If you want specifics, i will start with Bennett. Record is fine but style of play is horrible and you see he is maxing out talent. We talk about winning big on this board and I don't count him as a big winner. His teams plays great defense and boring basketball and you will not attract the types of recruits/athletes that you need to be in discussions to win Big Ten Championships and in the hunt for the Final Four every 4-8 years. Trying to be realistic when I say 4-8 years. Would love for it to be more regular but that is a big step from where we have been. The other guys in the
'mid-majors" mentioned do not do anything for me. Again, I could be wrong and a mid-major hire could be the next "Bill Self", but a lot of guys have been hired and fired every year from the small conferences with an eye toward being a star coach in the Power 5 conferences and it doesn't pan out. No thoughts on Monty Williams. Intrigued to hear more about him but appears he is not interested or available according to rumors. Cuonzo-somewhat intriguing but is he really a home run hire? Also, if he didnt have ties to East St. Louis, would he be as attractive if we weren't worried about losing some for the St. Louis area recruits-in particular Tilmon? He is not a guaranteed in my book. That is where Whitman makes his money. Hopefully, this satisfies your curiosity about my "magical and baseless thinking." Feel free to convince me on your choices.

Also, let me know how your middle of the road guy is better than keeping Groce one more year. Even if you extend Groce, you only extend him two years. The buyout is much less than paying off his last year and then being obligated for paying your middle of the road guy for 5 years if he doesn't work out. I am not in this to find a "bridge guy." I would rather bite the bullet for a year and roll dice on next year. No guarantees, but this year's crop is doing nothing for me. Also, waiting for theo inevitable small school tourney run coach just puts us right back in the mix for the type of coach we currently have.

 

[Ransom Stoddard]

Your argument makes no sense. So it's ok to keep kicking the can down the road until you think you can get the "right" guy?

Kicking the can down the road is why Bruce Weber owned an orange blazer waaaay past his expiration date.

 

[Ransom Stoddard]

If you want specifics, i will start with Bennett. Record is fine but style of play is horrible and you see he is maxing out talent. We talk about winning big on this board and I don't count him as a big winner. His teams plays great defense and boring basketball and you will not attract the types of recruits/athletes that you need to be in discussions to win Big Ten Championships and in the hunt for the Final Four every 4-8 years.
--snip

Great point, Wisconsin never won a B1G championship playing that type of....wait, never mind.

Also, let me know how your middle of the road guy is better than keeping Groce one more year. Even if you extend Groce, you only extend him two years. The buyout is much less than paying off his last year and then being obligated for paying your middle of the road guy for 5 years if he doesn't work out. I am not in this to find a "bridge guy." I would rather bite the bullet for a year and roll dice on next year. No guarantees, but this year's crop is doing nothing for me. Also, waiting for theo inevitable small school tourney run coach just puts us right back in the mix for the type of coach we currently have.

Please look at the last 3 years of WeberBall at Illinois and tell me why this idea should hold water.

 

[rdillini]

Great point, Wisconsin never won a B1G championship playing that type of....wait, never mind.



Please look at the last 3 years of WeberBall at Illinois and tell me why this idea should hold water.

Wisconsin did not win big on the national level until they got better athletes. Can it happen, sure. I was asked for a name, so I gave it. No idea what the reference to Weber ball has to do with wanting something more than a bridge guy.

I never said, anything about Cuonzo going to Missouri and me being concerned about that. Could he help their program right now, you bet. Would they compete better for ESL area talent, yes. Does that mean I am afraid of him going there, no. His name has been thrown around here and I am not sold on his abilities to dramatically improve the program. Could he be an improvement, sure. But if he is so great, i haven't seen his programs lighting the world up and maybe it is because he doesn't stay anywhere too long to see the building process through.

Remember, I have been asked for my thoughts, and there they are. Also note, that if there is a great hire to be made, I am for it. I just dont want to "settle" for a new coach. We have done that before. I would rather hire someone I really want to coach my team and is my "first choice" than to settle for the third or fourth guy to come along and make a change for the sake of making a change.