Vols' 2014 class rated 41st by 247

#51
#51
walkenvol said:
Or you pay for results.

We sure as hell didn't get our money's worth out of Kiffen and Dooley.

I agree with you on increasing the odds of success, just like recruiting 5* players.
Click to expand...

Yea, I am guessing they weren't near the top in pay in the SEC. But, they ended up being very poor hires by Hamilton. I actually didn't have a problem with Kiffin at the time, but in hindsight, it was bad. Dooley was just a bad hire from the start, and I barely knew who he was. Hamilton panicked. You see how one and especially two bad hires can put back a program. Heck, Butch Jones was barely in his tenure at Cincy, but he would have been a better hire then than Dooley.

Hamilton's expertise was accounting, and he wanted to be fiscally responsible. The problem is that if you gamble and fail, then your financials get worse. With UT's rich football tradition, we should be able to hire someone with some success at a high level (i.e. Butch Jones) instead of taking gambles. The reason why we had to hire Dooley is because the program was unstable and no succesful coach wanted to take that chance.
 
#52
#52
volbeast33 said:
Dooley...yes but Kiffin was just a different way of doing things....coach was paid decent but funneled money out to the assistants to have a "super staff".....we had one of the highest paid coaching staffs in the SEC.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.
 
#53
#53
VolGee4 said:
I understand the resources, but the logic is simple. When you hire an unproven mid-major coach, then there will be some bumps in the road and expectations won't be all that high. Because the way basketball recruiting is set up, coaches have to develop relationships over a couple of years. That takes time, especially at a place like UT, where the tradition is not all that great. Martin has been on the job for 2 and a half years.

In comparison, when UK hired (and paid for) Cal, they have instant credibility because Cal was already recruiting at a high level. They didn't have to wait, and in fact, he took the elite prospects that he was recruiting at Memphis.

So, just because we have a top 10 "budget," or top 10 "facilities," it still matters WHO you hire. People are assets, too, and I will tell you that people are the most important assets. In this day of instant gratification, people are quick to judge, and people don't realize that Martin was destined to be a slow recruiter because of his lack of major level experience (as a head coach). On top of that, he was put into a situation where he had to recruit half of his first roster. Again, you get what you pay for.

And if you want to bring up Pearl, well, that just doesn't happen everyday. We went through Green and Peterson before Pearl, so we hit 1 out of 3. You have a much better chance at success when you hire a proven high level head coach. When you are hiring "up and comers," they don't all pan out, but you take that chance.
Click to expand...

I was a new supervisor who received less pay than the previous supervisor based on experience. I had about three months training and after that my requirements were the same as the previous one. My requirements for our coach doesn't change based on his pay or experience. He needs to buck up and get the job done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#54
#54
volbeast33 said:
I was a new supervisor who received less pay than the previous supervisor based on experience. I had about three months training and after that my requirements were the same as the previous one. My requirements for our coach doesn't change based on his pay or experience. He needs to buck up and get the job done.
Click to expand...

I am guessing you weren't hired as a D1 basketball coach:) We could discuss exceptions and different jobs for the next month, but the question was why a coach at UT couldn't succeed because the resources were in place. I answered that. As I will say again, you get what you pay for.

People expected CCM to succeed in his first year (yes, there were complaints) because Pearl put those expectations in motion. I am simply stating why it didn't happen. You can blame the administration for not hiring a proven high level head coach- I don't care. It is what it is. For the record, I do believe that it is time for him to win this year. Everything is in place.
 
#55
#55
VolGee4 said:
I am guessing you weren't hired as a D1 basketball coach:) We could discuss exceptions and different jobs for the next month, but the question was why a coach at UT couldn't succeed because the resources were in place. I answered that. As I will say again, you get what you pay for.

People expected CCM to succeed in his first year (yes, there were complaints) because Pearl put those expectations in motion. I am simply stating why it didn't happen. You can blame the administration for not hiring a proven high level head coach- I don't care. It is what it is. For the record, I do believe that it is time for him to win this year. Everything is in place.
Click to expand...

Yes some people are over zealous in what they expect but this is yr 3 and it needs to be happening now...you act like he is making minimum wage, the man makes 1.3 million plus whatever other incentives he has.
 
#56
#56
volbeast33 said:
Yes some people are over zealous in what they expect but this is yr 3 and it needs to be happening now...you act like he is making minimum wage, the man makes 1.3 million plus whatever other incentives he has.
Click to expand...

Well again, comparing his salary to a regular job is like comparing my local club to Augusta National. Everything is relative.

Read this link about average salaries, especially where it says under Division 1 where the average salary for coaches in the 2012 NCAAT was $1.4 million. If CCM is at $1.3, then he is below average. Of course, the top 5 salaries will bring the average up. But, just doing a quick search, CCM is probably not in the top 30 overall salaries, and I think we all agree that UT is a Top 20 overall athletic program (maybe even higher).

The Average Salary of a College Basketball Coach | Chron.com
 
#57
#57
VolGee4 said:
Well again, comparing his salary to a regular job is like comparing my local club to Augusta National. Everything is relative.

Read this link about average salaries, especially where it says under Division 1 where the average salary for coaches in the 2012 NCAAT was $1.4 million. If CCM is at $1.3, then he is below average. Of course, the top 5 salaries will bring the average up. But, just doing a quick search, CCM is probably not in the top 30 overall salaries, and I think we all agree that UT is a Top 20 overall athletic program (maybe even higher).

The Average Salary of a College Basketball Coach | Chron.com
Click to expand...

I think u have it backward.....u get paid based off previous experience......it doesn't change the expectations.....if u want to settle for mediocre than more power to u but I choose not too.
 
#59
#59
volbeast33 said:
I think u have it backward.....u get paid based off previous experience......it doesn't change the expectations.....if u want to settle for mediocre than more power to u but I choose not too.
Click to expand...

Not sure how I have anything backward. First, I don't see how my discussion means that I settle for mediocrity. In fact, it's the opposite. Second, I don't have anything to do with hiring our basketball coach. Yes, it has something to do with previous experience, but you have to PAY for it! I would have hired alot of people over Cuonzo Martin, but our school is not willing to PAY for it. So, you get him, and people have to be patient because of it. But, whatever you choose to believe.
 
#60
#60
VolGee4 said:
Not sure how I have anything backward. First, I don't see how my discussion means that I settle for mediocrity. In fact, it's the opposite. Second, I don't have anything to do with hiring our basketball coach. Yes, it has something to do with previous experience, but you have to PAY for it! I would have hired alot of people over Cuonzo Martin, but our school is not willing to PAY for it. So, you get him, and people have to be patient because of it. But, whatever you choose to believe.
Click to expand...

How long do u think we have to be patient? It's a new AD, he did not make this hire. I would be ok with him so far if I felt his recruiting was good enough to be a winner.
 
#61
#61
volbeast33 said:
How long do u think we have to be patient? It's a new AD, he did not make this hire. I would be ok with him so far if I felt his recruiting was good enough to be a winner.
Click to expand...

You can see my previous posts about my expectations this year.
 
#62
#62
Roustabout said:
41 is not a terrible class. .
Click to expand...
that-s-not-turrible.american-apparel-unisex-fitted-tee.white.w760h760.jpg
 
#64
#64
bleedingTNorange said:
Except we do
Click to expand...

Until the respected sites can average out to be at least a top 25 recruiting class, I don't believe that this is an accurate statement. That is just like saying that on my WalMart scale at home I weigh 190, but at the gym I weigh 210, doctors office 215, Highland Games 16 stone. I'll hang up and listen...:detective:
 
#71
#71
knowthevols said:
I thought you always touted 247 as being the most accurate?
Click to expand...

If you can find a post where I said that I'll give you a cookie. I do like their composite, but that's simply because it removes politics and gives the most unbiased ranking. Doesn't mean it's the most accurate though.

Frankly I'm not sure which site is most accurate, would be an interesting study. I do think scout is the worst, but jmo.
 
#72
#72
bleedingTNorange said:
What I posted is the very definition of a fact you DA
Click to expand...

Its actually an opinion of ONE recruiting service out of many. Yes it is a fact we are in the top 25 of that service, but its far from fact we have a top 25 class. If they all can average closer to the top 25 we might be able say it more factually. No room for name calling as well. He just has a difference of opinion. Using DA doesn't prove your point more, just makes your argument less enjoyable to read.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#73
#73
etsuvol13 said:
Its actually an opinion of ONE recruiting service out of many. Yes it is a fact we are in the top 25 of that service, but its far from fact we have a top 25 class. If they all can average closer to the top 25 we might be able say it more factually. No room for name calling as well. He just has a difference of opinion. Using DA doesn't prove your point more, just makes your argument less enjoyable to read.
Click to expand...

So his post was more fact based than mine?

If you knew this posters history you'd understand why I refer to him as a DA, because he is one.
 
#74
#74
germanicus said:
Seventh in SEC. KY top-rated in nation. UF 4th. Vols behind those two, Arkansas, Bama, Missouri and Vandy in league.

Maybe can shore it up in the Spring.

2014 Basketball Recruiting Team Rankings
Click to expand...

The class seems underrated to me by 247's standards. Using their rankings we basically have 4 top 150 guys (Turman being 152). Its hard to believe there's 42 classes out there better than that. I'll gladly take a balanced class of top 150 talent every year and call it good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#75
#75
With Stokes(possibly), Maymon, Mcrae & Barton leaving after this year I really have concerns about our front line in 2014. For now I'm going to enjoy this season.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top