The irony is that every outgoing coach we have one assistant coach really pushing for the job, only to go with a proven head coach at a lower level. Then we are upset when that coach is not loyal and jumps at the next offer…

I am by no means saying we should hire an assistant, because what we’ve been doing has worked so well. But if our hiring practice is to get the best available coach, then we should expect those coaches to go for the best available job.

I remember people clamoring yo hired Eric Peterson when Smith left. A year later he became the head coach at South Dakota, and has gone 24-38.

I am really glad we went in a different direction. I guess, he night still be coaching here though and that would make some people happy...

Under the current climate we almost have to hire a head coach because it’s the only way to get fast recruits/transfers. Really you’re not only hiring the coach now. You’re hiring his current team and recruiting class to some extent. If you don’t do that your current t class transfers and you’re left with nothing.

justinmorrey wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 8:11 am

Under the current climate we almost have to hire a head coach because it’s the only way to get fast recruits/transfers. Really you’re not only hiring the coach now. You’re hiring his current team and recruiting class to some extent. If you don’t do that your current t class transfers and you’re left with nothing.

this is the real reason you hire HCs looking to move up with players grateful to get any NIL, to have fans who care, to get exposure on a bigger stage, and have a chance at the dance.

We hire proven head coaches because Stew Morrill, Larry Eustachy, Craig Smith, Ryan Odom, Danny Sprinkle are greater than Tim Duryea and Kohn Smith.

The last 2 guys we hired had been in the NCAA tourney. That's gotta be the floor for me.

GordoAggie wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 8:39 am

The last 2 guys we hired had been in the NCAA tourney. That's gotta be the floor for me.

So that takes Todd and Tod off the short list. Who do you have in mind?

GordoAggie wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 8:39 am

The last 2 guys we hired had been in the NCAA tourney. That's gotta be the floor for me.

Okay. But this year there were a lot of one bid conferences that sent like there conference 5th seed. Would you rather higher the coach at Montana State that went 17 and 18. Or would you rather hire the guy at that won 25 games and finished 1st or 2nd in the regular season but lost in there conference tournament(toledo or UC irvine)? Or would you rather a guy that has turned 2 perennial worst teams in amaerica into 20 win teams(todd simon)?

Because I am not seeing a guy out there that is all the things, that is realistic this year.

You never know what will work out and what won't work out, but we have an extremely good track record for hiring proven head coaches. I'll take winning and the coach leaving every time over a question mark. Having coaches constantly bolt is annoying, but not nearly as annoying as losing. I'll take another one year wonder in an instant if we get the same results we just got from sprinkle.

Basically, Washington paid us for the privilege of having Sprinkle coach our team, with players he brought here, for 11 months. We also got a MWC championship and NCAA tourney win out of the deal. Sounds like a great trade, one that probably won't be replicated. I choose to be happy about it. Also, the portal and free transfers made it all possible. I hate it, but we don't have this season without the mayhem.

LarryTheAggie wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 8:50 am

GordoAggie wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 8:39 am

The last 2 guys we hired had been in the NCAA tourney. That's gotta be the floor for me.

Okay. But this year there were a lot of one bid conferences that sent like there conference 5th seed. Would you rather higher the coach at Montana State that went 17 and 18. Or would you rather hire the guy at that won 25 games and finished 1st or 2nd in the regular season but lost in there conference tournament(toledo or UC irvine)? Or would you rather a guy that has turned 2 perennial worst teams in amaerica into 20 win teams(todd simon)?

Because I am not seeing a guy out there that is all the things, that is realistic this year.

Why does it have to be one of those three options? We’re willing to pay a lot more than we have in the past and the “options” people are posting here lately are extremely underwhelming. Not sure any of them will end up being the new coach.

We've got some money, a good reputation, and lots of options. Can't wait to hear what Sabau does.

ratofallaggies wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 9:31 am

LarryTheAggie wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 8:50 am

GordoAggie wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 8:39 am

The last 2 guys we hired had been in the NCAA tourney. That's gotta be the floor for me.

Okay. But this year there were a lot of one bid conferences that sent like there conference 5th seed. Would you rather higher the coach at Montana State that went 17 and 18. Or would you rather hire the guy at that won 25 games and finished 1st or 2nd in the regular season but lost in there conference tournament(toledo or UC irvine)? Or would you rather a guy that has turned 2 perennial worst teams in amaerica into 20 win teams(todd simon)?

Because I am not seeing a guy out there that is all the things, that is realistic this year.

Why does it have to be one of those three options? We’re willing to pay a lot more than we have in the past and the “options” people are posting here lately are extremely underwhelming. Not sure any of them will end up being the new coach.

I am not saying it does. I am just saying that there has to be more to the criteria than they went to the NCAA tournament this year. I don't see a lot of low major coaches that went to the NCAA tournament that really excit me. And there are some that did not go that I thing would be good hires.

I am sure Sabau will hire a great coach. And we should all be glad that this board does not get to choose.

LarryTheAggie wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 9:36 am

ratofallaggies wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 9:31 am

LarryTheAggie wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 8:50 am

GordoAggie wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 8:39 am

The last 2 guys we hired had been in the NCAA tourney. That's gotta be the floor for me.

Okay. But this year there were a lot of one bid conferences that sent like there conference 5th seed. Would you rather higher the coach at Montana State that went 17 and 18. Or would you rather hire the guy at that won 25 games and finished 1st or 2nd in the regular season but lost in there conference tournament(toledo or UC irvine)? Or would you rather a guy that has turned 2 perennial worst teams in amaerica into 20 win teams(todd simon)?

Because I am not seeing a guy out there that is all the things, that is realistic this year.

Why does it have to be one of those three options? We’re willing to pay a lot more than we have in the past and the “options” people are posting here lately are extremely underwhelming. Not sure any of them will end up being the new coach.

I am not saying it does. I am just saying that there has to be more to the criteria than they went to the NCAA tournament this year. I don't see a lot of low major coaches that went to the NCAA tournament that really excit me. And there are some that did not go that I thing would be good hires.

I am sure Sabau will hire a great coach. And we should all be glad that this board does not get to choose.

I think last year the general consensus on the board was that we should take sprinkle. I think there was even a poll. Maybe we should just poll it out and see how good our collective minds can be?

flying_scotsman2.0 wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 10:00 am

I think last year the general consensus on the board was that we should take sprinkle. I think there was even a poll. Maybe we should just poll it out and see how good our collective minds can be?

How are we going to get another poll started without AggieIceCream here?

My 2 cents (which is all it is worth) is to continue hiring the young up and comer head coach with his eyes on making it to the top. With the environment like the Spectrum to play in and a passionate fan base, A GOOD coach is going to win here.....and he's going to move on.

If you take a chance on hiring an assistant, you waste time vetting whether they can coach (probably lose more) and it they turn out to be good, you'll lose them after some mediocre seasons and one good one anyway. Why be the one that allows them to learn and grow (thus wasting time)? I'd rather win immediately with less risk of mediocrity.

ususports wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 10:05 am

flying_scotsman2.0 wrote: ↑

March 27th, 2024, 10:00 am

I think last year the general consensus on the board was that we should take sprinkle. I think there was even a poll. Maybe we should just poll it out and see how good our collective minds can be?

How are we going to get another poll started without AggieIceCream here?

Ask the Troll @FloridaAggie13 to start the poll. AIC was Florida's research assistant and was mentored by Florida.