ADVERTISEMENT

Basketball Facilities, etc.

L

Loyal Coug

Hall Of Fame
Sep 27, 2003
7,967
995
113
Re-posting this from a poisoned thread on the other board.......

I'm curious as to what the gang thinks we need for infrastructure. And what is realistic. And I have no preconceived notions, other than the opinion that Beasley is not going anywhere nor is a new structure going up. We started to discuss this a while back in relation to Gonzaga's mutt house, which doesn't appear to be all that gold-plated - not much in the way of luxury-type amenities......?

Couple of thoughts:
  • Practice/workout facilities - I thought we built/renovated something in Bohler or one of the gyms not that many years ago? And with Football out of there, are the fitness facilities OK as is? Once upon a time the Bohler addition was state of the art. And what do you really need for basketball anyway?
  • Coliseum - Are luxury boxes/suites a big need? I'm confident this could be done at Beasley - with some big jackhammers. Would they be marketable?
  • What else?
  • Non-facility-wise, a commitment to some charters is big in my humble opinion
  • Additional thought - back when we were good, I thought that it would be cool to have a pregame event for at least some games. The field house is only a block away. The meeting rooms in the Beasley bowels could support a limited crowd - we used to do some pregame chalk talk thing right? Don't think you could pull it off in the outer concourse
 
Nothing will happen to Beasley until it's literally falling down and a hazard. It's nothing special any longer but fine. I would hate to go to an arena that seats less than 6,000 ala GU even though we can barely justify what Bohler holds at the moment. From a priority perspective I feel like Beasley is bottom of the list.

We "built" something in Smith Gym but when I saw a video of it it really just looked like signage on the walls and floors. A real practice facility seems to cost around $15 million to do. It's not going to make as big of an impact in basketball as the football complex but that's not to say the lack of a basketball facility isn't hurting us from a competitive standpoint since we are probably the only program in the conference without one. Pullman is a big enough challenge as is. So we need it but can't afford to do it right. We probably can barely afford the cost of charters.

Agree Charters are the current must have and have been a must since Dick/Tony. There was some internet talk someone was willing to step up and do it but wasn't taken up on the offer during Moos' watch. Unbelievable if true.

Charters now and a practice facility as soon as possible. We need more from the "little guys" and a big donor or donors to foot the bill and get a practice facility done. Realistically someone is going to have to step up and specify $10-12 million on a practice facility to get it done. If the school tries to do it alone it will most likely be on the cheap and probably end up a bit of a waste of money (bubble thing).
 
Loyal Coug said:
Re-posting this from a poisoned thread on the other board.......

I'm curious as to what the gang thinks we need for infrastructure. And what is realistic. And I have no preconceived notions, other than the opinion that Beasley is not going anywhere nor is a new structure going up. We started to discuss this a while back in relation to Gonzaga's mutt house, which doesn't appear to be all that gold-plated - not much in the way of luxury-type amenities......?

Couple of thoughts:
  • Practice/workout facilities - I thought we built/renovated something in Bohler or one of the gyms not that many years ago? And with Football out of there, are the fitness facilities OK as is? Once upon a time the Bohler addition was state of the art. And what do you really need for basketball anyway?
  • Coliseum - Are luxury boxes/suites a big need? I'm confident this could be done at Beasley - with some big jackhammers. Would they be marketable?
  • What else?
  • Non-facility-wise, a commitment to some charters is big in my humble opinion
  • Additional thought - back when we were good, I thought that it would be cool to have a pregame event for at least some games. The field house is only a block away. The meeting rooms in the Beasley bowels could support a limited crowd - we used to do some pregame chalk talk thing right? Don't think you could pull it off in the outer concourse
Click to expand...

On my must have list:

1. A 18,000 seat Staple Center like basketball only facility where Todd is now.
2. An adjacent fully self contained BOB.
3. An adjacent multiple level 4000 vehicle parking garage.
4. Expansion of the PMA to allow for wide body jets and commericial charters.
5. A university own jet fleet from small (recruiting trips) to large enough to transport the football team and support staff, with all necessary support buildings.
6 Expansion of the 195 to a 6 lane 90 mph autobahn style super highway that circumvents Colfax.

With these facilities we can save on coach and staff costs by hiring Ken Bone or Paul Graham back, as even these guys will be able to put us in title contention. It is called the "bag of hammers" "I have a dream" plan. The 750 million price tag will be covered by state matching funds, TV revenue, seat/luxury box licenses, concessions, donations and increased ticket sales. I've done the numbers, it will work if we can sell out consistently (and get a Saudi prince as a backer).

The only other option is to spend the money necessary to hire a proven winning "name" coach, upgrading more modestly as success and revenue permits. But that ain't sexy, and could cost 5 million a year (ugh!) and would have far less chance for success than "the plan," where successs is guarranteed.
 
Name a " winning name coach" who would take the job in Pullman at any price, given our current facilites, bad location, and overall state of the program
 
avabob11 said:
Name a " winning name coach" who would take the job in Pullman at any price, given our current facilites, bad location, and overall state of the program
Click to expand...

You start offering to make WSU next coach the highest paid in the conference by a million, fifth highest in the country, you'll get interest. Greed is an amazing thing. You spend 750 million in facility upgrades but offer 650K salary, the interest will come from the Big Sky. Just as in life, a nice office doesn't pay the rent. You'll leave that office for a cubicle, if you are offered a 50% salary increase. As Oregon/UCLA/ASU/CAL/OSU football has proven facilities are the salt and pepper, the coach is the meat and potatoes of any propram. The real question is "name a program that built its way to success? McKale was built ten years before Lute, Wooden won two championship before Pauley was built.
 
Don't disagree about greed, but a proven name coach will have a lot of choices, and the premium we would have to pay would probably be gigantic. The kind of coach you are talking is only going to a destination school
 
avabob11 said:
Name a " winning name coach" who would take the job in Pullman at any price, given our current facilites, bad location, and overall state of the program
Click to expand...

Gawd you are getting negative! Perhaps you need to renew that prescription? Oh, here, have one of mine! (borrowed from Overboard)

We are in the Pac-12 fer Chrissakes. What league is Mother Mary's team in? What's their coach make?

How did Raveling bring success to us in a more difficult time? This is a bit of a riddle......
 
avabob1 said:
You think that was a more difficult time?
Click to expand...

What Ferris said. "Was it easy?"

ava you were there. Was it easier in 1974 when the NCAA tourney had 25 teams? OK they went to 32 in 1975.

Transportation, communications, media, etc. etc. WSU was way more remote back then. Nobody knew who we were. Football team hadn't been to a bowl since 1930. George was unknown.You think it was easier for him to build a team?

Oh and you are ignoring the topic of the thread. It is about facilities. Or was.
 
Not talking about getting to the dance. We didn't measure success that way back then.
I think recruiting was easier then. Nice new facility, easier to get marginal students in. We packed great crowds knowing full well UCLA was going to the dance.
 
avabob1 said:
Not talking about getting to the dance. We didn't measure success that way back then.
I think recruiting was easier then. Nice new facility, easier to get marginal students in. We packed great crowds knowing full well UCLA was going to the dance.
Click to expand...
I think having the facility was important but it wasn't a facility driven era. Wasn't Raveling flying in recruits at night to make Pullman seem bigger? ;) Seriously though we have never had it easy in any era.
 
I totally agree with that statement. Wasn't just the size of Pullman. George once said " Pullman isn't the end of the earth, but you can see it from there". Rav recruited as well as he did despite the remoteness and size of Pullman. Again, Rav got a lot of kids who we couldn't have got in today. No SAT requirement until later. I remember Collins and House didn't even come back to Pullman after their loss in the NCAA tourney.
 
i always thought that Stuart House.s father put his son in the remotest place possible to try and keep him away from his addictions and personal problems. It did not work as House wasted his great talent and never really did what he was capable of on any level/
 
That was the time. A lot of "stuff" was going on and not just at WSU. I think Raveling's final team was starting to take on a different feel but regardless it speaks to the difficulty it's always been recruiting to Pullman especially in basketball. We have a history of taking on some risks.
 
I agree. You could get almost anyone into school in those days. Remember Fred Snowden. He brought 5 kids in off the Detroit playgrounds, had a pretty good team, then brought 5 more in the next year when the first group mostly left.
 
I don't think most of this in years past was facility driven at all. It was coach driven or rather assistant/AD driven. Eastman wasn't at all bad at many things other than getting an assistant or two that could recruit. As his talent went away so did his record. If you look at the records of many of our HC's they got worse and then they became irrelevent.

Same is true of the current regime. It was 100% all about the HC and he failed miserably for the first 3 years. Then he appears to have dumped his "buddies" and gotten some recruiting help. So perhaps in the next couple of years he can turn it around.

His history was the same as our HC's above tailed off at Oregon. One tends to forget that the Kentucky assistant left and then it all went away.

Not so much facilites as today seems to feature in the "arms" race.
 
avabob11 said:
Name a " winning name coach" who would take the job in Pullman at any price, given our current facilites, bad location, and overall state of the program
Click to expand...
That coach will be a W-State alum. Once Beasley sells out then facilities will come with it because "Coach Cougar" will demand it then recruit better:)
 
12375CAT said:
That coach will be a W-State alum. Once Beasley sells out then facilities will come with it because "Coach Cougar" will demand it then recruit better:)
Click to expand...
Haskins or Seltzer (both on staff)?
Or are you dreaming big: D'Angelo Casto or Paul Wulff?
 
I said from the beginning that Keats biggest mistake was in retaining the "ace recruiter",who basically turned out to be a flop. The quality of players being recruited has gone up a notch in a very short time since his release. Sure he recruited Flynn and Franks but they were not highly rated recruits. the adage of "even a blind squirrel sometimes finds an acorn" applies.
 
I know this thread is about facilities but I want ask a question about a 70s player I don't read about on these boards. My Coug Basketball history begins when I got to campus so I'm not overly familiar with the 70s. I've read the names; House, Willams, Collins. I was scouring the internet and perusing CBA stats from the late 70s early 80s and came across a guy named Ron Davis from WSU who put up some monster numbers in that league. He got some NBA time. Where does he fit on the list of WSU greats? Was he at WSU very long? I may not have noticed him mentioned as his name isn't a memorable one.
 
Ron Davis was a JC out of Arizona who played his last two years at WSU. He was drafted by Atlanta. Played some CBA and then for the clippers in later years. One of the good JC's that Raveling brought in. He shot as I recall a very nice percentage and was still on the lists. Scored like 17 ppg and 8 boards his senior year. Was a 6-6 wing the type that Raveling really liked.

LoveJeffersonFanClub said:
I know this thread is about facilities but I want ask a question about a 70s player I don't read about on these boards. My Coug Basketball history begins when I got to campus so I'm not overly familiar with the 70s. I've read the names; House, Willams, Collins. I was scouring the internet and perusing CBA stats from the late 70s early 80s and came across a guy named Ron Davis from WSU who put up some monster numbers in that league. He got some NBA time. Where does he fit on the list of WSU greats? Was he at WSU very long? I may not have noticed him mentioned as his name isn't a memorable one.
Click to expand...
 
EL I don’t understand your need to find someone other than Kent to blame. You never blamed anybody but Bone or June for their troubles but always give a free pass to Kent. Kent was brought to WSU to be the “ace recruiter” and so far has produced recruiting classes that have been ranked last in the PAC 12 every year but one and that class didn’t pan out as well as expected. Our recruiting is dismal at best, we over hype mid level JC players and live off 2 star and lower level 3 star recruits. Like you said we occasionally find an acorn.
 
Ernie's recruiting prowess is right up their with Moos' fiscal management and fundraising ability.
 
More on Ronnie Davis. He was a 6-5 high scoring wing out of Glendale CC in Az. He played beside Poudakis on the first real turn around season Rav had. Lefty with a flat but decent jumper. He was a real burner to the hoop.

As for recruiting, both Bone and Ernie have brought in some good players, but not enough to overcome any bad breaks which both have gotten. For Bone: Moore, Aden, Lacy, Ladd, Woolridge, Que, Ike, Hawkinson, Longrus. All looked like good additions on paper. Some had injury issues, Moore got booted, others didn't really live up to expectations.

Ernie struck out in year one, but finally had a decent base going into next season before Flynn and Franks bolted.
 
Ernie Kent is supposed to be the closer. The top recruiter is the one who is supposed to beat the bushes and find the talent and players who may want to come to Pullman . The ace recruiter is the one who brings the players in for their visits. Allen did not bring in the quality of recruits that are necessary to build a winning team,Kent basically screwed up by keeping the guy, but many on both boards celebrated because he was retained. I immediately said get rid of him,the basketballs,ball boys etc,anyone and anything connected to Bone s program. JD and staff did a good job of recruiting but hired hubby and did a terrible job of coaching. That was the reason udub let her go.Perhaps Kent waited two years too long to dump his ace recruiter. He is now in a position where he better win next year or he may be turned out to pasture. As you said it comes down ultimately to the head guy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Loyal Coug1

Gushiken, etc?

Replies
11
Views
4K
The Cougar Lair
Loyal Coug1
Loyal Coug1
7ICoug

First Up

Replies
1
Views
1K
The Beasley Baseline
Coug1990
Coug1990
D

Meanwhile, on the Syracuse board.....

Replies
22
Views
2K
The Cougar Lair
Cougini5591
C
P

WSU solution?

Replies
28
Views
2K
The Cougar Lair
dgibbons
dgibbons
Loyal Coug1

Interesting Brand Y article

Replies
5
Views
3K
The Cougar Lair
dgibbons
dgibbons
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back