I have read numerous times on this board how Hobbs could not fire CVS, how she had him over the barrel, and, well, a bit of innuendo besides.
100% true that it would have been difficult to fire or replace CVS. However, the reason is not (specifically) related to her - rather, Rutgers would have found it difficult to fire or replace ANY coach, based on the following:
- Member, Naismith and WBB Halls of Fame
- Exemplary record at Rutgers, RU winning percentage .648; only 4 losing seasons, 2 of them her first 2 years and a 3rd 20 years ago
- Exceeded her Rutgers career winning percentage the last 3 years; exceeded her career (overall) winning percentage last season; winning percentage .684 over the last 4 seasons.
- Won 20 or more games in all 3 of the last "full" seasons, 14-5 in the Covid shortened year
- Made the NCAA tournament as an at large 7th and 6th seed in the last 2 tournaments
- Seeded 3rd (twice) and 5th (once) in the last 3 B1G Conference Tourneys.
- Successful recruiting including a player Guirantes drafted into the WNBA in 2021, Diamond Johnson, etc. Next year 2 McDonald's players are coming, that recruiting is "on her"
The only negatives - some health concerns and a failure to advance significantly in the post-season tournaments.
While some disappointment by fans is 100% understandable, and the administration could have expressed some dissatisfaction with the season endings -
The truth of the matter is that, in WBB, you simply cannot terminate (without other causes) someone with the recent accomplishments listed above. The reason is very simple - you are not going to attract the best coaching candidates if they feel that the school is not "appreciative" (for want of a better word) of performance. I don't remember who we were talking to years ago, but this issue was mentioned by someone in the "business". It is all very well to terminate a coach when they are not performing well (or for other reasons) but it is the ultimate bad look to replace someone who is performing at a decent level.
Certainly, the negatives were concerns and should have been factored into the contract, but ultimately, there was no way that CVS would not have her contract renewed if she wanted it at the end of last season.
I apologize for the rant. But I think some posters are so focused on their desire to replace CVS over the years that they cannot see how difficult it would be for Rutgers to maintain a reputation in the coaching ranks by making a difficult to support move.
100% true that it would have been difficult to fire or replace CVS. However, the reason is not (specifically) related to her - rather, Rutgers would have found it difficult to fire or replace ANY coach, based on the following:
- Member, Naismith and WBB Halls of Fame
- Exemplary record at Rutgers, RU winning percentage .648; only 4 losing seasons, 2 of them her first 2 years and a 3rd 20 years ago
- Exceeded her Rutgers career winning percentage the last 3 years; exceeded her career (overall) winning percentage last season; winning percentage .684 over the last 4 seasons.
- Won 20 or more games in all 3 of the last "full" seasons, 14-5 in the Covid shortened year
- Made the NCAA tournament as an at large 7th and 6th seed in the last 2 tournaments
- Seeded 3rd (twice) and 5th (once) in the last 3 B1G Conference Tourneys.
- Successful recruiting including a player Guirantes drafted into the WNBA in 2021, Diamond Johnson, etc. Next year 2 McDonald's players are coming, that recruiting is "on her"
The only negatives - some health concerns and a failure to advance significantly in the post-season tournaments.
While some disappointment by fans is 100% understandable, and the administration could have expressed some dissatisfaction with the season endings -
The truth of the matter is that, in WBB, you simply cannot terminate (without other causes) someone with the recent accomplishments listed above. The reason is very simple - you are not going to attract the best coaching candidates if they feel that the school is not "appreciative" (for want of a better word) of performance. I don't remember who we were talking to years ago, but this issue was mentioned by someone in the "business". It is all very well to terminate a coach when they are not performing well (or for other reasons) but it is the ultimate bad look to replace someone who is performing at a decent level.
Certainly, the negatives were concerns and should have been factored into the contract, but ultimately, there was no way that CVS would not have her contract renewed if she wanted it at the end of last season.
I apologize for the rant. But I think some posters are so focused on their desire to replace CVS over the years that they cannot see how difficult it would be for Rutgers to maintain a reputation in the coaching ranks by making a difficult to support move.