If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
I'm not looking this up, so correct me if I'm wrong. Folger came to WSU with a pretty good team already intact. He bolted to Vandy, leaving the cupboard bare at WSU & recommending Cohen. Vandy also had a good team in place and after using them up, bolted to USC. That's where he made his mistake ... he had to build a team there, became a .500 coach and retired young.
I think it's common knowledge that Eddie could coach better than he could recruit.
I'd throw Bruce Weber in there as well...
"Don't measure yourself by what you have accomplished, but by what you should accomplish with your ability."
-John Wooden
I'm not looking this up, so correct me if I'm wrong. Folger came to WSU with a pretty good team already intact. He bolted to Vandy, leaving the cupboard bare at WSU & recommending Cohen. Vandy also had a good team in place and after using them up, bolted to USC. That's where he made his mistake ... he had to build a team there, became a .500 coach and retired young.
The team Fogler inheirited when he arrived was around .500 the year before.
Leaving WSU with John Cooper and Paul Guffrovich is hardly leaving the cupboard bare. The problem was with his replacment, Diamond Mike Cohen.
You don't suppose because a lot of the coaches moving "up" from non-BCS schools are hired by the bottom BCS tier schools who have a long history of losing could be an influencing factor in this, do you?
There are naturally exceptions, MT being a prime example. And certainly some coaches succeed at schools similar to SCU, but the odds seem to be stacked against them.
You don't suppose because a lot of the coaches moving "up" from non-BCS schools are hired by the bottom BCS tier schools who have a long history of losing could be an influencing factor in this, do you?
There are naturally exceptions, MT being a prime example. And certainly some coaches succeed at schools similar to SCU, but the odds seem to be stacked against them.
That is a factor...but there are alot of examples of coaches who have elevated a program (Pearl, Gillispie, Scott Drew, etc.) It just seems the MVC coaches who have moved on haven't had much success. The jury is still out on whether MT will succeed at aTm.
It could be a total coincidence. Or it could be that MVC coaches don't fare better for a reason. Style of play, coaching pedigree or lineage, or ????. I'm not trying to play devils advocate, it just struck me last night watching Bruce Weber.
Comment