HarveyGlass

Willard is someone I'm surprised hasn't been mentioned.  He's done a great job at HC, has great connections, is fairly well-known, and comes from Pitino.

Hmmmm.

They may talk about Pelfrey but no way has a guy that has coached somewhat successfully in the Sunbelt proved that he deserves one of the top jobs in college basketball.

UK will fire Tubby this year (after the tourney) and they will make a move for Donovan. He hasn't signed an extension with UF. Maybe he will use UK as leverage to get everything he can out of UF and stay but his whole team is leaving and it maybe the right time to move on. UK can throw boatloads of money at him.

If not successful with Donovan then they might go after a coach like Gilespie. Someone who has proven they can win at an elite level. Not a guy from the Sunbelt who's been in the tourney once with an early exit. Maybe in the future but he'll have to prove it at a higher level.

That's not the point.

The point is that they have followed his career and recognize he is a very good coach.  Take it FWIW.

Here's some UK perspective on Pelphrey to USF...

http://kentucky.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=1383&tid=91678029&mid=91678029&sid=888&style=2

LOL, if Tubby Smith is let go after this season, Pelphrey is going to be the guy UK hires?  Please.

I dont know about this guy, we should have just stuck with Mac if we were going to hire the guy from the direcectional school of South alabama.  Here we go again.  

I know...I was fully expecting Coach K, or Roy Williams.

I think a young coach like Pelphrey would be great for our program.  He is the exact opposite on the bench then Ma was.  

In DW I trust.

Yea...thats exactly what my point was.  i only expect Coach K and Roy Williams.  I hope thats not what you really got out of reading it and were just reacting to the post because I posted it.    

You may think Pelphry will be great for our program and he very well might be but I dont trust a guy to rebuild a Big East program when he goes 36-48 in the sunbelt.  Call me crazy.  Sure its hard to recruit to the sunbeslt but its also hard for his opposition to recruit to the sunbelt.  Seems we should be looking at the guy in the sunbelt with at least a winning record.  

John Pelphry and USF does not make for a desireable place to play bball, IMO.   Maybe Pelphry and Pittsburgh, but not USF.  We need someone with some name recognition and good coaching skills to get the fans and recruits to come.  

Nobody is going to be awed and attracted to guys like Gillen et al.  lol

USF needs a salesman, regardless of experience, that will get people excited.  Pelphrey's playing style and passion will draw people like flies.  Just like it has at USA.

I follow UK Ruger, and I know that a very large segment of their fanbase want Pelphrey bad.  They can see the way he gets his kids to play(with heart, passion) and compare that to the robotic boorishness of Tubbyball.  He gets the most out of his guys and would do the same with BigEast caliber athletes at USF.

The only caveat to hiring him immediately is the lack of experience.  They want to see him work in a major conference first.

I predict Pelphrey and Ford will be big-time coaches ten years from now.  They were both a part of something very special on that team under Pitino, and I think they still carry that magic with them.

You're never going to be rid of the gambling factor.

It doesn't matter if you hire Wooden or Woody from the rec league, what happens in every situation is a mystery.  Especially when your guys are Gillen and Lutz, who have never shown any consistency.

I've got the Vols losing to A&M.  I've been impressed this year.

I'd love to see the Cards play 'em regularly again.  They had some great games a few years ago.

Remember this...

LINK

[highlight]"Hey, I have to keep working because my wife and daughter still keep shopping," Gillen deadpanned. "They're pathological spenders." [/highlight]  ;D

Gillen would be a fine choice.  He knows the BigEast, and the Bulls could do a whole lot worse.  But I bet there's more truth in that sentence than most would admit.

...anything would be a positive for USF.

See, I think that's where you might be screwing up.  It seems like a cycle of mediocrity.  If you have no standards and no expectations to live up to, you're aiming waaay too low.

I read on here how not making the NCAA's at least every once in a while should be unacceptable, yet it will be much harder for Amaker to make it in the BE than the BigTen.  He's not taking you dancing.  If you're alright with that, and all you want out of your hoops coach is that he's a nice guy, then I understand accepting failure.  But if USF is serious at all about making the dance and just competing in the BE, then the standards have to be completely obliterated and rebuilt even higher by someone who knows how to do it.

The Bulls need a young hungry go-getter with built-in expectations, IMO.  Not a coach that knows how to BS an apathetic fanbase and is literally running out of food and looking for a sunny payday.

I look at Amaker a little like Davis from IU to UAB.  When UAB got him, it was like a big exhale from Davis.  Expectations are lowered, the fans feel lucky to have him, and you could almost hear Davis saying, "gee, it feels great not to have to work as hard down here."  That's the last thing I want for USF.

I may be a Louisville fan first, but man I want the Bulls right up there with them in the BE.

Then why dismiss anyone?

Throw the names of all these great coaches(Amaker, Lavin, Gillen, Lappas, Barnum, Bailey) in a hat and see who wins the "my money is running out and I need another chance" sweepstakes.

Amaker did very poorly at Michigan, and people think he is going to do better in the BigEast?  Good luck with that.  How could someone think that he will be set up better to succeed here than at Michigan?

Yours is an exception to the rule.  To not use a coaches history as a measuring tool is not a good idea.

Ammaker may have fallen short at Michigan but he is a real quality guy. Many thought he would be the heir apparent for coach K at Duke. He did inherit a mess at Michigan but just could not push them over the top. I think Grant is a better fit for USF but Ammaker would be a fine coach.

I agree, Amaker would be a good choice. I've thought that we would benefit more from an "established" coach. The problem was that most of those guys (Lappas, Jarvis, Lavin) were not guys we wanted. While an up and commer or a big time assistant are good options, I think we need someone with a name. Being that we don't have the money to sway a top flight coach, I think Amaker would be a good option. You have to think we are going to be last in line for the likes of Grant and some of the other mid-major head coaches.

Quality guy does not equal quality coach.  The reason he is no longer the heir apparent to Coach K or anyone else, for that matter, is that he is not very good.

It would be nice to have a "name" coach for several reasons.  However, it should be a good name.  The name, "Tommy Amaker" is synonymous right now with underachieving and all the negative connotations that come with it.  There can't be many people in the basketball industry who think that Amaker got a raw deal at UM.  He had six years there and a better coach would have had them in the dance at least once, sanctions or not.

On the other hand, if an "established" guy like Weber at Illinois, or Smith at UK were forced out, USF should jump all over them.  The national community would see those firings as unjust and would love to see them do well elsewhere.

I don't think I can agree that coaching USF will be easier than coaching at Michigan even with probation.  If you can't even get to the NCAA's in six years at a place like Michigan, you are not going to do better at a place like USF.

And without seeing USF facilities recently, I would think that Michigan's "worst in the BigTen" are still better.  I could be wrong, but as short as 15 years ago, UM was a basketball power and surely their facilities haven't crumbled since then.

As I said in another thread, stay away from failure.  The Bulls have seen enough bad days and they don't need someone bringing the stink of underachieving from somewhere else as well.

USF really needs to start fresh.  Blow it up and build it from scratch the right way.  Buckley, Mattis, and Richardson are gone, and who knows who else may leave.  Whoever comes in will need time to build an imposing program.  

And while someone like Grant or Gillispie can build legitimate national powers from absolutely nothing in as little as 1 and 3 years, respectively, Amaker can't do jack in six years at a school with so much more to offer than A&M and VCU.

I'm not saying Woolard should get Grant or Gillispie, because they are destined for better things right now, all I'm saying is that there are coaches out there who are special and Amaker is not one of them.  Why settle?

Good grief, Amaker at USF?

He couldn't even sniff the NCAA at a school with the advantages that Michigan has over USF.  Recruiting hotbed, great facilities, money, 6 freaking years, BigTen, etc., etc., etc.. :

Michigan should jump on Grant yesterday, and Amaker should have to sit out a year or two to think about what he has done. LOL

I would say that Michigan has proven they don't know squat about hiring bball coaches since Fischer.  And even Fischer has proven that he was merely a recruiter more than a coach.  Watch 'em get Wojo. ;D

He would be worth firing an uninspiring coach just to get him.

If Michigan was thinking about firing Amaker, this would make me pull the trigger.

Vanderbilt is OK, IMO.  They certainly shouldn't be 30 points better than GW.

I'm just bitter because I picked them to beat Vandy. :'(

No comment, BasketBull?

I would think there would be some interest in this game. :-?

Somebody forgot to tell Hobbs to draw up a gameplan for Vanderbilt.

GW look like they don't know what sport they are playing.  Yuk.

I'm not against Pelphrey...I just had to insert my feeling on how the larger, established programs have more resources available - including the fact they are easier to recruit to - and can certainly take greater risk than a program like ours.  Pelphrey may be good.  But a program that can only accept little risk may be better suited going for a more proven commodity that the fan base, donors, and sponsors can relate to.  Someone that can build a program sorely in need of renovation from image to facilities to travel to the media.

I hear what you're saying, but the only proven commodity that USF will be able to get is a guy who failed somewhere.  If I'm Woolard, I stay away from failures and look to the future.

FWIW, a large number of Kentucky fans would love to have Pelphrey back after Tubby.  Most do want him to pick up some more experience though.

You guys may be setting yourself up for some serious disappointment.

Amen to that.

"Quick fix" my arse.  It ain't happening.

Some people want a big name, but what's most important is that USF gets a good coach.  And chances are, no one is going to know if he's a good coach for a few years.

So for the love of iced tea, do not join the new and improved darkside just because you've never heard of the guy, or he makes less than another coach.

I get the feeling that the OP would give up on the coach before he even started if he doesn't fit into some preconceived notion.

After seeing in the other thread who Woolard has hired before, at St. Louis, I'm getting pretty excited about his chances at landing a good one.

I thought both Romar and Soderberg were great hires for St. Louis.  And Woolard should have more to sell here.

It's going to take more than a coach, however, to turn this thing around, but hopefully, the right one can be a catalyst to push the athletic department.  Woolard's going to need to find someone he can work with, instead of just turning a coach loose and checking in every once in a while.  Will he do it?

Great questions.

I'm interested in what the folks who wanted Mac gone think of #3.

LOL

I've actually got ND losing in the Elite Eight against UF.  Nobody in that half really impresses me.

I don't think Pitt has the guardplay to go deep.  I have them losing to UCLA in the Sweet Sixteen, but I could see them losing to Wright State, VCU, or Duke.

Georgetown is in my title game, losing to UF.

I think Marquette will get beat by MSU in the first round.

'Nova should be too physical for Kentucky.  All bias aside( ), a UK team that has lacked toughness all year will get blown out by a truly tough team.

Louisville will probably scrape by Stanford, then lose to a very good Texas A&M.

The Cards beat Cincy by 6 in Louisville last year(2006).  You'll have to ask HaulingBull what the attendance was.