Re build every 3 to 7 years is a minimum

Talk XU Men's basketball here...
Xavier2005
Posts: 359
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2016 3:58 pm
Contact:

Re build every 3 to 7 years is a minimum

Postby Xavier2005 » Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:45 pm

I do not blame Steele or the players. We all know that X will never pay the $4 mil to $7 million a year for the right coach , who will stay long term and thus build a dynasty program with Final Fours and top tier players. Thus X fans must be content with a few Elite 8s and rebuilding every 3 to 7 years ...versus always reloading. Xavier is a top 50 program when it is at its peak. A top 1 seed was obviously the best for the Dance, but that team did not even make the Sweet 16......whereas X had lower seeding when an Elite 8. X fans will experience years of the roller coaster ride of up and down the top 50. it is what it is. Not Steele's fault he got a rebuilding year with the left overs.
jct1941
Posts: 2065
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 10:16 am
Contact:

Re: Re build every 3 to 7 years is a minimum

Postby jct1941 » Tue Dec 25, 2018 10:55 pm

Xavier2005 - You right on it because Miller's first year was 17 and 12 record and went up from there. Steele is between a rock and a hard place with the players he has and will be lucky to have a winning record this year. However, we all might be selling him short and maybe he could surprise us all and turn this thing around. Go Xavier!
mumuskie87
Posts: 12148
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:27 am
Contact:

Re: Re build every 3 to 7 years is a minimum

Postby mumuskie87 » Wed Dec 26, 2018 5:23 pm

Xavier2005 wrote:
Mon Dec 24, 2018 9:45 pm
I do not blame Steele or the players. We all know that X will never pay the $4 mil to $7 million a year for the right coach , who will stay long term and thus build a dynasty program with Final Fours and top tier players. Thus X fans must be content with a few Elite 8s and rebuilding every 3 to 7 years ...versus always reloading. Xavier is a top 50 program when it is at its peak. A top 1 seed was obviously the best for the Dance, but that team did not even make the Sweet 16......whereas X had lower seeding when an Elite 8. X fans will experience years of the roller coaster ride of up and down the top 50. it is what it is. Not Steele's fault he got a rebuilding year with the left overs.
Could be worse...like having Mick Cronin for Xavier's coach.
"Sports is a coffee break."
Al McGuire
"If someone offers to double your money, walk away. If he offers to make you 20 %, hear him out."
Al McGuire
User avatar
Shadow
Posts: 6168
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 1:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Re build every 3 to 7 years is a minimum

Postby Shadow » Wed Dec 26, 2018 7:23 pm

mumuskie87 wrote:
Wed Dec 26, 2018 5:23 pm


Could be worse...like having Mick Cronin for Xavier's coach.
Sir! Bite your tongue.
Moderator EMERITUS, Musketeer Madness.
tacitus
Posts: 1326
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 11:31 pm
Contact:

Re: Re build every 3 to 7 years is a minimum

Postby tacitus » Thu Dec 27, 2018 6:10 pm

I agree in part with this "cyclical" theory of XU hoops, with the caveat that our cyclical trend has been upwards since Staak. Each coach has brought new milestones to the program.

It is no secret that Miller has probably been our best Xs and Os coach, and Matta has been our best CEO coach, but Mack also continued the tradition of new heights, giving us our highest rankings in the AP and two highest seeds in the tournament. Despite his post season performance, Prosser brought in recruits who generated unprecedented national hype.

Personally, I think Mack is an above average coach on all fronts, and his primary contribution to the program was the idea that Xavier was a destination job. The hometown boy and Xavier grad shooting down offers from Power 5 schools, in addition to our move to the Big East, left the impression that we were on the verge of becoming an elite program by making a final four or more. Recruiting and competing and dancing were not going to be problems.,,,

Steele will once and for all put to the test the theory that our program is greater than any one coach… But lest we forget that the bar is much higher now: What is mediocre to our fan base now is not what was mediocre when Miller or Mack took over. I think that not making the Dance this year will not set us back. But I do think a sub-20 win season would set us back a few years, and if we do not make the tournament next year, it could be more than a rebuilding…. (Prosser was the last coach to go two years without making the tournament!)

My point is that a rebuilding year means middle of the pack in the Big East and just missing out on the tournament, and if we are not rebuilt by next year, then Steele will (and probably should) be in the hot seat.
Let's March!
madness31
Posts: 2062
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Re build every 3 to 7 years is a minimum

Postby madness31 » Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:03 am

Missing the tournament 2 years in a row shouldn't necessarily put Steele in the hot seat. He has a strong recruiting class for next year but they will be freshman. The current roster has a ton of holes and expecting freshmen to fill those holes in a meaningful way might be asking for too much. I'm skeptical that Q, Marshall and Jones will develop much by the start of next year. Scruggs on the other hand has already shown healthy growth from last year and could take another leap next year.

Year 3 will be the big year for judging Steele. We will want to see some development from him this year and next but he needs a complete roster with some experience before we can panic over missing the tournament. Hopefully they team can find its way into the dance next year but too early to expect it.
kyzrex
Posts: 1552
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 8:35 am
Contact:

Re: Re build every 3 to 7 years is a minimum

Postby kyzrex » Fri Dec 28, 2018 8:07 am

The expectations of fans, especially many of those fans that frequent the forums, doesn’t necessarily mirror the expectations of the administration. We tend to be mainly interested in the results...wins and tourney success. However, we don’t see all of the things that either hamper those results or enable them to happen. Nor do we tend to focus on the other things that are important....graduation rates, behavior of the players on and off the court, assistant coaches, how well the staff gets along with others in the department, etc. Sometimes even very successful coaches (successful based on wins, etc.) can wear out their welcome and be asked to leave (see Bob Huggins and UC). Others may not have the on court success that is expected, but may be given more of a pass because of success in other ways or relationships with administrators. Point being, we fans only see the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the total program and we don’t really make decisions in these areas. (See Marvin Lewis!)

My gut tells me that the freshman coming in are going to make this a much better team, but we really have no idea at this time what next years roster will be. Heck, we don’t even know what the lineup for tomorrow’s game is going to be! Still a long time left in this season, take it a day at a time and see where it ends up when the time comes.
#WHYNOTX?
madness31
Posts: 2062
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 11:21 pm
Contact:

Re: Re build every 3 to 7 years is a minimum

Postby madness31 » Sun Dec 30, 2018 12:59 am

I agree with kyrex to a point but there is no denying that money controls just about everything. Fans paying the bills certainly control what the administration does with coaches. Lose enough and every coach is gone. That being said, I believe his point is that some are a bit premature in calling for a change if things don't go well in the first couple years.

I'd be shocked if changes were made after year 2 or if he was verbally put on a hot seat. The only way I could see that is if his recruiting class for next year fell apart. Outside of that, he is locked in for 3 years and probably for 4 or 5 barring a disaster in years 1 - 3. If he chokes all 3 then everything is on the table. Way too early to speculate because he is playing with a depleted roster. He did well filling the spots. The transfers are contributing at a high level, just not at the level required to be where most want the program to be.
Anti-Homer
Posts: 5169
Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2010 6:53 pm
Contact:

Re: Re build every 3 to 7 years is a minimum

Postby Anti-Homer » Sun Dec 30, 2018 9:42 am

madness31 wrote:
Sun Dec 30, 2018 12:59 am
I agree with kyrex to a point but there is no denying that money controls just about everything. Fans paying the bills certainly control what the administration does with coaches. Lose enough and every coach is gone. That being said, I believe his point is that some are a bit premature in calling for a change if things don't go well in the first couple years.

I'd be shocked if changes were made after year 2 or if he was verbally put on a hot seat. The only way I could see that is if his recruiting class for next year fell apart. Outside of that, he is locked in for 3 years and probably for 4 or 5 barring a disaster in years 1 - 3. If he chokes all 3 then everything is on the table. Way too early to speculate because he is playing with a depleted roster. He did well filling the spots. The transfers are contributing at a high level, just not at the level required to be where most want the program to be.
he is locked in for 3 years and probably for 4 or 5 barring a disaster in years 1 - 3

I agree with this, and believe he should get a three year lease. I think, a lot like Miller in AZ, Steele came into a situation where the predecessor left the program in less than optimal circumstances. X still has top 60 or so talent, not top 15 like we fans have been accustomed to, but the parts are awkward, and depth lacking. Part is due to lackluster recruiting efforts, due to CM recruiting for two colleges simultaneously, and obviously losing arguably the best tandem of four year players in X’s history in Bluiett & Macura, as well as two other good players in Kantner and O’Mara.

X has proven to assess coaches much more holistically than 95% of programs, and I agree with this philosophy. I remember a story (I don’t recall if I read it, or if my brother told me), where Skip had his year-end dinner assessment with Father Hoff. Anticipating being challenged about the lackluster season, Skip had talking points prepared as to why he should be retained despite that. Instead, Fr. Hoff came armed with a contract extension.

Skip Prosser did a decent job, but was the least successful head coach in the last three decades. However, he was the best human being (though the bar wasn’t extremely high) relative to his successors, who graduated his players, elevated the already high integrity of the program, and was a great ambassador for X. As much as I want tremendous success for the bball team, I’d rather win less with guys like Skip, than win more with guys like Bruce Pearl, Rick Pitino, and Mick Cronin. Hopefully Steele develops the acumen of his three predecessors on the court, and Skip off. Guys like Brad Stevens, Mark Few, and Jay Wright provide the template.

Seacrest out.

Edit: Apologies to Pitino for lumping him in with two guys who don't win in games that count. They are equally off putting though, so they have that going for them, which is nice.

Return to “Xavier Men's Basketball”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: X-man and 27 guests