Bobby Hurley to ASU as head coach
- Thread starter UMRU
- Start date
Believe the answer is no.
The reason probably is because Bobby was in his third year of coaching and was an assistant for two of them at
Wagner a NEC conference school and then at URI (A-10) , both under his brother Danny .
Not really enough experience to be given a shot, but Buffalo (MAC) took a chance and he was a success there.
Should be a good hire for ASU and he'll be part of a program that the AD plans on upgrading or rep[lacing the Basketball arena in a couple of years.
Check out Scarlet Nation's MBB board for better info then I'm giving on this board
Pretty sure the Hurleys wanted a guaranteed 8 years because of the massive job at hand. Rutgers moved on.
Good job for ASU. I can't see Hurley leaving ASU unless it is for Duke or another top 20 type program. I don't see him being on the Rutgers radar unless we are able to pay top dollar and improve the facilities. ASU is a better job then Rutgers right now.
I have family in the Phoenix area and have visited ASU.
Advantages:
- weather is awesome and a great place to live
- lower income taxes than NY and NJ which puts more money in Hurley's pocket ($10,000 of savings for each 1% of lower income taxes per million earned in salary)
- Pac12 money - ASU has PAC12 money coming in and can spend on a coach
- little brother to Arizona. They have an inferiority complex to Zona and want to change that to become the team in Arizona
- located next to the biggest city in the state
- can get a great property in Scottsdale for about 1/2 of what it costs in NJ
- can recruit NY and NJ - can sell kids on the weather of Arizona, playing in the Pac12, and the investment by the school in sports
Disadvantages:
- if recruiting NY and NJ he is asking kids to travel 2100 miles away to college. Some may prefer to be more local.
- He is selling the Pac12 while NY and NJ kids grow up watching the Big East, ACC, and Big 10.
- ASU is not a big name in hoops
- will he stay at ASU or jump in 3 years to a bigger basketball school
- can ASU truly compete with Zona in state and UCLA in the P12?
- the campus has become like a city with mostly a New Brunswick like atmosphere of lots of buildings and less open space
- I was told that the President of ASU has eliminated on campus fraternity houses. Greek life may be on a decline at ASU. My friend showed me where the Greek houses used to be. Many are now dorms or on campus apartments.
- since ASU is so close to Phoenix and Scottsdale, it has a higher % of commuter students than Arizona
- ASU has multiple campuses. Some majors are in their Phoenix campus and not the main campus
- Phoenix has become a pro town with the Cardinals and Suns so ASU is not the top sports item in town
I have family in the Phoenix area and have visited ASU.
Advantages:
- weather is awesome and a great place to live
- lower income taxes than NY and NJ which puts more money in Hurley's pocket ($10,000 of savings for each 1% of lower income taxes per million earned in salary)
- Pac12 money - ASU has PAC12 money coming in and can spend on a coach
- little brother to Arizona. They have an inferiority complex to Zona and want to change that to become the team in Arizona
- located next to the biggest city in the state
- can get a great property in Scottsdale for about 1/2 of what it costs in NJ
- can recruit NY and NJ - can sell kids on the weather of Arizona, playing in the Pac12, and the investment by the school in sports
Disadvantages:
- if recruiting NY and NJ he is asking kids to travel 2100 miles away to college. Some may prefer to be more local.
- He is selling the Pac12 while NY and NJ kids grow up watching the Big East, ACC, and Big 10.
- ASU is not a big name in hoops
- will he stay at ASU or jump in 3 years to a bigger basketball school
- can ASU truly compete with Zona in state and UCLA in the P12?
- the campus has become like a city with mostly a New Brunswick like atmosphere of lots of buildings and less open space
- I was told that the President of ASU has eliminated on campus fraternity houses. Greek life may be on a decline at ASU. My friend showed me where the Greek houses used to be. Many are now dorms or on campus apartments.
- since ASU is so close to Phoenix and Scottsdale, it has a higher % of commuter students than Arizona
- ASU has multiple campuses. Some majors are in their Phoenix campus and not the main campus
- Phoenix has become a pro town with the Cardinals and Suns so ASU is not the top sports item in town
the Hurley ship has sailed for Rutgers and for Seton Hall as well. Its stunning that two up and coming sons of the greatest high school coach in New Jersey could not at least land at one of the big NJ schools given both of those schools horror show lineup of past failures as head coaches
Local AZ reported noted that ASU signed Hurley to a 5 year deal...but official details will probably be found out later today when he is officially introduced as the new HC.
I dont think it was too short sighted to not give a guy who had two years as HC at Wagner a 7 year contract. Its good business. Notice no other BCS schools did that either.
Also - whats to say that ASU wouldnt have simply hired him away from us? If they could, then we didnt lose much by not getting him. We would be back at square one, after having taken a huge risk. If they wouldnt, its either because he didnt get it turned around, so its not a win for us, or because we would pay up to keep him - in which case we simply need to pay up to get someone equivalent when we decide we are done with Jordan.
To me the much bigger bungle was not paying whatever it took to get Ben Howland.
I agree 7 years was too long then and it would be too long now. How often do you see such a contract for a coach in general let alone one with little experience. Those long term contracts are usually reserved for really strong coaches. Oliver Purnell is one off the top of my head that I think got a long term contract like that at DePaul. He had more success at Clemson and Dayton than Hurley. So how did that long term (7 years I believe) work out for them. Purnell just left after 5 with nothing to show for it. I'm not sure how the financials worked out on his departure. His resume was much stronger than Hurley's.
I would've liked Howland too but that UCLA SI article may have been too much after Rice. I don't think it was that big a deal but because of Rice maybe. But if he was still available after Jordan (if that's necessary) then I don't think it would've mattered.
Derleider...Bobby was hired at ASU not Danny....also this is a 7 year project...best case scenerio has Eddie reaching 500 in year 5..at least Hurleys can recruit.
The poster he was replying to was lamenting the fact that we didn't hire Danny though, not Bobby. He and I also were debating that point that it wasn't the wrong decision to pass on him given the contract length asked.
It may be a 7 year project, which I'm not sure of btw but for argument's sake say it is that long a project. I still wouldn't want to be stuck in a 7 year contract even if it's a 7 year project. I want to know that the guy I hired is heading in the right direction by year 3-4 and can either renew or get out of it if necessary. If he's got a 7 year contract, you really can't get out of it for an extra couple years knowing that we won't swallow a big buyout of a coach's contract.
I've said I like Bobby better than Danny even though his coaching resume is shorter but both are still a risk to hire at this point in their careers. They could be successful but with the shorter track record your confidence in that isn't as firm. It's just logical to see it that way. The more experience a person has the better probability of success.
+1. Will be shocked if Eddie gets to .500 in year 5 at RU.
not to be negative but we seem to be much farther away from NCAA's now than when the previous 3 HC's were here. And that is saying something for a long time RU fan.
That distance was made larger once the dodge ball practice and verbal abuse by the previous HC was made public.
The closest of the last 3 to the Dance was Waters and he didn't go Dancing in the five years he was HC.
If 3 NITs with two losing years and a 79-75 record is what makes a great RU MBB HC, Gary was what all RU HCs should strive for.
The last RU HC's season record for all of his 3 seasons wasn't any better that the terrible HC 's final season record .
But there are some that look on Rice with the fondness reserves for head coaches that have made their programs successful.
If RU is a 7 year project, manbe Eddie getting to ,500 in his fifth isn't as bad as it seems.
Then RU MBB might not look so bad to those RU goes after because Eddie made the RU MBB program
more desirable to quality candidates because Jordan fixed a lot of the things that made RUa n undesirable location
before he was hired and the reason a lower program's HC wanted a 7 year contract so he had time to fix the mess Rice left and the mess of a program RU was even before Coach Dodge-ball made it less desirable after he was forced out.
Remember the program Jordan took over and if it's 500 by his fifth year , it wil not be a reason to keep Eddie, but
a reason RU might get quality to consider becoming the RU MBB HC.
but here is the issue...if 500 is not going to be achieved until MAYBE year 5 and year 7 is possibly when the NCAA is a possibility...wouldn't we be better served by a complete do over at this point because it seems like everyone has just given a pass to Eddie for two years...we didn't need to pay $1.2 million for a pass or placeholder. So Eddie is still starting from scratch, there is no more appreciable talent in year 3 ready to play than in year 1. The Rice leftovers even if they were small in numbers still had potential and that potential wasn't realized...currently the roster is made up of a bunch of lightly recruited players plus Sanders. I am not sure that is such a great recipe for success in the Big 10. I just believe that there are other coaches out there that are better suited for the college games and can squeak out some more wins and provide energy to a rapidly aging and fading fanbase. If I could point to something Eddie did as progress the last two years I would not be so hard on him but really he did nothing with what was left here, that does not inspire confidence in me. I have never been one of those who just excused a coach for not having all his own players. Fred Hill was abysmal with Waters players, that killed him because he couldn't mesh them with the players he recruited. Waters overachieved when he was hired by taking Bannons players and simply winning...Rice did an excellent job coaching his first year with terrible talent. Wenzel took Littlepages bad years and reversed course in one year. Even Bannon improved upon Wenzel. I am just using these as examples. You have to show something and no one fluke win over Wisky isn't what I am talking about. I wanted to see more of what I saw in Rices first year with toughness and competitiveness
The terrible talent Rice inherited had about the same W-L record under a terrible HC the year before as they did Rice's first year. Rice didn't coach them up, he kept them the same as Freddie's coaching did.
As for the talent that Rice left, after their first year under MR,they only shown hope of improving, but not improvement.
It was the old Brooklyn Dodger saying with their potential: Wait till next year." Rice left nothing but a dysfunctional program
but one Eddie wanted to coach because of his connection and love for it.
Also RU needed a coach that would bring good PR with the hire, no one out there wanted the job and Hurley considered it before walking away.
Jordan brought instant creditability at a fair price, don't begrudge him that in your effort to make him look like a bad hire and
make Rice look better than he really was.
Waters wasn't right for Rutgers and 5 years without Dancing proved that, along with 2 losing records in his 5 years..
Gary had his players overachieve, but not enough to go Dancing or have a winning season every year.
He needed to go and by his 4th year a lot of RU fans felt that way. Freddie was a cheap replacement that failed but his last year shown the improvement that Mike Rice record all three of his years didn't exceed.
Rice was over-matched and not the savior many think he could have been. He recruited talent his first recruiting class, then didn't develop them enough to have a winning season.
He took over Hills experienced team and couldn't win more games with them then Freddie did the year before.
Jordan took over a dysfunctional mess and gets the first two years as a freebee.
His third year should be held to hirer standards than what Rice is getting and/or the memories of Waters is receiving from some who hold Jordan responsible for what RU MBB is now and what it was when he took over after Mike Rice almost destroyed it.
Bring up how great of a coach Rice was, but he never made RU's W-L record better than the team he took over from Freddie had the year before and Freddie was a terrible HC.
This post was edited on 4/10 7:08 PM by MADHAT1
I would disagree with this as they lost Rosario who was probably scoring like 17 ppg so how could it be the same level of talent. I think that takes care of the record argument...could you imagine if the team actually had a scorer that year to go along with Jonathan Mitchell who went from average to very very good under Rice. I watched every game closely that year...the defensive effort and heart the team showed in one game was as much as Freddies teams showed in an entire season. No comparison. The reason I bring the other coaches up is to say basically you have to start showing some sign of coaching prowess or pulse even if its not your own guys. Jordan was given Mack, Jack, Judge, Seagears and then got a guy who played solid bball at Pitt in JJ Moore. That was a solid nucleus in a conference that was so so like the AAC was. They really should not have been as bad as defensively as they were given that all of them played much better defensively their prior seasons. The regression of Jack this year was killer. That lands on both Eddie and Kadeem and the non development of Jordan's recruit Etou who many touted as the future also does as well. Etou had ample opportunity to show something on an offensively and defensively challenged squad this year
This post was edited on 4/10 8:17 PM by bac2therac
This post was edited on 4/10 8:17 PM by bac2therac
Mitchel improved as a senior under Rice, but not as much as you imply and it was his second year ( and last) on the court
for Rutgers after transferring from Florida and sitting the required year after transferring.
Dane Miller regressed under Rice because of the way he was treated and never showed the talent he had because of MR.
Losing Rosario opened up the offense for other players and Mike's shooting was missed, but not like you imply because
of Rosario's FG percentage was not that great ( if I remember correctly)
As for Seagears under Eddie, lost case because of Rice.
Mack was a player Rice left that could have done well off the bench, but because of a depleted roster , had to handle the ball more than he should.
Jack was talented wasted, but I believe he played better his first year under Jordan than he did as a Rice player.
Rice relied on Carter like Freddie did Rosario and that wasn't a good thing.
Jordan started off with a depleted roster and a PG ruined by Rice that didn't fit at RU under Eddie and was treated like
he should have because of his attitude, bench.
Rice left jack-doo-doo for Eddie and Freddie left a better team for Mike than you're saying he did.
Freddie wasn't a good coach , but he did improve his last season, Rice stayed the same all three years and destroyed
some of the players under him while he was RU's HC.
What Jordan had to start with because of Rice should have every RU fan pissed at Rice, not defending him in an effort to make Jordan look bad.
Rice 's record doesn't match your praise and Eddie's first two years are a result of what Rice did to RU MBB and hurting the development the players that stayed after he left.
MR's comfortable in chaos, wound up only chaos be the time he was finished with the RU MBB program.
Mike Rice was not the coach many think he was, Eddie Jordan deserves a chance to prove he's better because of
how Mike Rice left him very little to work with and players who had their talent held back by the way Rice used them .
