Bracketology

Agree on all of it. I do think he did a decent job getting the last two teams to buy in on defense, I remember seeing from February on both years were top 10 or so Defenses. He finally got “his” style of players and the team got worse as the season went on.....horrible job all around. Like I said above I just don’t want him sneaking in the tournament next year and saving himself. The program needs to be solid and at least safely in come selection Sunday (8/9 seed) or be completely terrible and we let go of him.

Biggest fear is hanging on to a guy that hovers around sneaking in and making strong NIT runs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xavier

Agree on all of it. I do think he did a decent job getting the last two teams to buy in on defense, I remember seeing from February on both years were top 10 or so Defenses. He finally got “his” style of players and the team got worse as the season went on.....horrible job all around. Like I said above I just don’t want him sneaking in the tournament next year and saving himself. The program needs to be solid and at least safely in come selection Sunday (8/9 seed) or be completely terrible and we let go of him.

Biggest fear is hanging on to a guy that hovers around sneaking in and making strong NIT runs

---

If he doesn't take a step next year, this honestly could end of being a 7-8 year lull.

If he fails next year, and gets let go, it's basically another 2-3 years process to build it up again, with a new coach likely going through the same growing pains, with hopefully a quicker learning curve.

For the sake of all us, I hope he gets this figured out pronto.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drudy23

If he doesn't take a step next year, this honestly could end of being a 7-8 year lull.

If he fails next year, and gets let go, it's basically another 2-3 years process to build it up again, with a new coach likely going through the same growing pains, with hopefully a quicker learning curve.

For the sake of all us, I hope he gets this figured out pronto.

---

I agree hope he figures it out but at the same time it didn’t take Alabama and Arkansas long to get better. Both are top 10 teams right now. I think this is the 2nd year for both coaches. What they did though was get better talent quickly and of course that helps, but they also obviously know how to coach and win college basketball games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xavierj

I agree hope he figures it out but at the same time it didn’t take Alabama and Arkansas long to get better. Both are top 10 teams right now. I think this is the 2nd year for both coaches. What they did though was get better talent quickly and of course that helps, but they also obviously know how to coach and win college basketball games.

---

Those schools also have the funds to hire a more established coach with good head coaching chops that doesn't require a steep learning curve.

Who's paying for the $2-3M per year coach on Victory Parkway?

Both Oaks and Musselman are over $2.5M per year

I believe Mack left at $1.6M and that was after years of success and multiple years of figuring out how to get his salary that high. No clue what Steele makes, but I'm guessing less than $1M.

It's why getting the coach right is so important here - we can't pay buyouts or competitive salaries for established winners with head coaching experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drudy23

Those schools also have the funds to hire a more established coach with good head coaching chops that doesn't require a steep learning curve.

Who's paying for the $2-3M per year coach on Victory Parkway?

---

By all accounts x offered Christie Mack over 3. With that said, they did decide to go cheap w Steele

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xville

By all accounts x offered Christie Mack over 3. With that said, they did decide to go cheap w Steele

---

And I'm guessing that would have required lesser expense somewhere else in the basketball program, or a fund from boosters to get to that point.

Bama and Arkansas are just cutting the check.

Xavier is probably a better job from a basketball perspective than Bama and Arkansas, but they have football money. Most established coaches almost always follow the money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drudy23

And I'm guessing that would have required lesser expense somewhere else in the basketball program, or a fund from boosters to get to that point.

Bama and Arkansas are just cutting the check.

Xavier is probably a better job from a basketball perspective than Bama and Arkansas, but they have football money. Most established coaches almost always follow the money.

---

Nate oats was far from established. He came from at best a mid major program that had found success. Can certainly get an up and comer like Oates in the 2 neighborhood from the jump. If x can’t afford that, might as well go back to the a10.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xville

Nate oats was far from established. He came from at best a mid major program that had found success. Can certainly get an up and comer like Oates in the 2 neighborhood from the jump. If x can’t afford that, might as well go back to the a10.

---

I agree, but he had 4 full years as the head of a program before jumping to Alabama. Regardless of where that's at, that is a huge advantage coming in the door. Coaches coming in from even average mid majors are almost always better candidates than brand new head coaches - but they're more expensive, and that's always a factor. It's even more of a factor at X.

And yes, I agree that X has to be willing to go get a guy like that. But they've never really done that before in the modern era.

Skip one year at Loyola
Matta one year at Butler
Miller first head coaching job
Mack first head coaching job
Steele first head coaching job

I have a good feeling we're likely in the tournament 2 of the last 3 years if we had hired an established coach.

Pete and Staak were first head coaching job as well. 7 coaches, two years total of head coaching experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SM#24

Pete and Staak were first head coaching job as well. 7 coaches, two years total of head coaching experience.

---

So it really makes you wonder:

1) Was X just really, really lucky; or
2) Is Steele doing something so drastically different that isn't working? Or are we at an inflection point where the Xavier administration has to change and double down somewhere to get to the next level? Who is the next visionary to know what that decision is? Maybe it's time to start going after experienced coaches with proven success as conquering the Big East is a much steeper mountain to climb?

I have a hard time discounting the 40 years of continued success as "luck" however.