Tiger Board Logo

Donor's Den General Leaderboards TNET coins™ POTD Hall of Fame Map FAQ
GIVE AN AWARD
Use your TNET coins™ to grant this post a special award!

W
50
Big Brain
90
Love it!
100
Cheers
100
Helpful
100
Made Me Smile
100
Great Idea!
150
Mind Blown
150
Caring
200
Flammable
200
Hear ye, hear ye
200
Bravo
250
Nom Nom Nom
250
Take My Coins
500
Ooo, Shiny!
700
Treasured Post!
1000

YOUR BALANCE
Hiring Name Coaches
storage This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic
Replies: 5
| visibility 1

Hiring Name Coaches


Mar 18, 2019, 1:56 PM

Over the years there has been much discussion re hiring a "name coach and don't spare the money" when we have a vacancy. Since 1940, we have had nine head football coaches, Howard, Ingram, Parker, Pell, Ford, Hatfield, West, Bowden and Swinney. Hatfield was, perhaps, the only "name" coach we have hired. Several have had "short term" success. When we refer to our most successful programs, there are usually three names that stand out, Howard, Ford and Swinney. All three of these coaches were promoted from within and their initial salary can be considered a bargain basement salary at the time of their hiring.

In no way do I imply that promoting from within is the best way to hire a coach. There are many factors to consider and name and salary is not a sure fire guarantee of success. Some highly successful coaches may not be the proper "fit" at another school. Some times a hire that turns out to be successful may be attributed to just plain luck rather than being hired based on checking the right box on all of the questions.

There are a number of lower level schools that consistently have an excellent basketball program. Is this due to superior coaching and recruiting or is the success gained by perceived less talent in these lower level schools who are their opponents? Can a coach who is successful at these lower level schools translate his coaching and recruiting skills to a school such as Clemson? Most of our coaching hires have come from some of these second tier programs and we are still not out of the wilderness. With each hire, we expected an improvement, and in some cases there was improvement, but it was not a permanent fix. Where do we go from here? I honestly have no idea.

badge-ringofhonor-joe21.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Re: Hiring Name Coaches


Mar 18, 2019, 3:07 PM

Joe I love your take on hiring new coaches.You are the only one that don’t know several hires who would take us to the top of the mountain.Im glad the powers that be don’t listen to those “who know “who should be hired to get the desired results. We haven’t had any stellar coaches in basketball yet some who are mentioned now have been elevated to heights they never achieved while at Clemson

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: Hiring Name Coaches


Mar 18, 2019, 3:17 PM

The only "NAME" coach we EVER hired was John Heisman...and he walked off and left us for those MIT wannaBEES...

2024 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

It's such a marriage between the coach and the admin.


Mar 18, 2019, 3:28 PM

Even if you hire a great coach as a "mercenary", they're not going to hang around long unless the admin shows it's willing to do all it takes to win - salaries, facilities, recruits, all of it. Similarly, an admin that WANTS to win won't hold on to a coach who isn't performing for very long.

If you look at the real blue bloods what you see a long, long relationship between coaches and admin. That is, these schools aren't "revolving doors" of great coaches. In 120ish years of bball, #1 Kentucky has had 22 coaches, same as Clemson. But Adolph Rupp was 41 of those years. 1/3 of UK BB history was him. Calipari, Hall, Tubby and Pitino make another 41 years. That's 2/3 of their history.

UNC has had 18 coaches. Smith was 36 years, almost a 1/3 of their history. Williams and McGuire make another 25 years. Duke has had 19 coaches. K for 39 years, 1/3 of their history, and Cameron and Bubas add 25 more. Kansas has had only 10 coaches - Phog Allen for 39 years, and Self and Williams add another 31 years. Syracuse has had 10 coaches. Boeheim for 43 years and Andreas for 25 more.

So in all these cases, you've had just a few coaches, 2 or 3, but with admin support for years and years and years, an "marriages" around 40 years in some cases.

Clemson has had coaches that can win. Ellis has done it in several places, Barnes has done it too. Obviously there were other circumstances that lead to those divorces. BB is about to become the winningest coach in Clemson ball. That might not be saying a lot, but he can win. And without superstars at that. I remember when Samson passed though UVA and Duncan passed through WF. They were great for a while, but fell back to mediocrity when they moved on. Now, UVA has made a recent commitment to push up again after middling for a long while.

My suspicion is that if the Admin wants to pour more resources in we could win more with BB. But it does seem that after a decade the two have reached a comfort level where he wins just enough, and they commit just enough. I doubt he can do more unless they do more. And if he could do more, and they were holding him back, he'd probably have moved on by now. When and if all that will change idk.

flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Re: It's such a marriage between the coach and the admin.


Mar 18, 2019, 6:04 PM

Kind of sounds like you are saying that if BB was a better coach, he would already have been poached or moved on of his own accord. Sadly, both are probably true statements. Clemson basketball has had fleeting moments of glory in the past, but I am bereft of future hope at this point in time, since we seem unwilling to invest in that future by making a change. (And no, I don't have a candidate in mind. But we can just as easily lose with a new coach as with the one we have now, and would have hope for awhile again after making a change.)

2024 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up


Hiring from within as opposed to a "big name "


Mar 18, 2019, 7:13 PM

coach .
Joe , certainly no one for hiring a coach is perfect or comes with a guarantee .

I think the advantage to hiring from within is clear . Your AD knows from daily observation of assistant coaches what the guys work ethic and personality are . He's more likely to get a diamond in the rough rather than a very costly dud who doesn't work out .

badge-donor-05yr.jpg flag link military_tech thumb_downthumb_up

Replies: 5
| visibility 1
Archives - Tiger Boards Archive
add New Topic