...very successful smaller school coach, but just a different name to throw in the ring to discuss.
https://athletics.whitman.edu/coaches.aspx?rc=19
https://athletics.whitman.edu/coaches.aspx?rc=19
Eric Bridgeland
- Thread starter CougSinceBirth
- Start date
I don't want say that every small school coach is a no but a major conference is a different beast. Ken Bone was very successful at lower levels. Everything would have pointed to success at WSU given that track record but it was not. I really feel the difference comes down to recruiting. The lower levels you can get all the left overs for the D1 or D2 and make it work with X and O's. At our level you really need to recruit and be excellent at identifying under the radar talent that would be successful within your system. That is something most of the lower level coaches don't always excel at. Not saying I am right but that is my gut feel.
The best "lower level" coaches recruit the best of the left overs - the aren't going to be in the mix to get the kids that UNC or Duke get anyway. That should speak to their recruiting. I mean, unless you ARE Duke or NC or Kansas et al... who else is going to steal those recruits away? Maybe, maybe an occasional TX, AZ or UCLA, but MBB make FB look like the minor leagues when it comes to have's and have-nots.
All I am saying is that I'm not sure that being at a lower level school is an automatic indictment of a coaches recruiting ability. Its possible I'm saying that because I get the feeling that we'll end up with a lower tier coach and I want to be optimistic about it, whereas you and other's have set your sights on big-name big-splash or bust.
Wasn't necessarily an endorsement from me, but he has been successful and appreciate the discussion. Just thinking outside the box of "retreads."
I think Brand Y mentioned Russell Turner from UCI and would have to agree he's another intriguing name.
I think Brand Y mentioned Russell Turner from UCI and would have to agree he's another intriguing name.
Sorry to be one of those fans, but if he wins the curve representing my tolerance of tantrums becomes very steep. I agree, its not my favorite look for the college, but neither is being completely irrelevant.
Not saying they need to get high level recruits, just saying that recruiting at that level is a different animal. I would prefer to have a coach who knows the ins and outs of our level and has experience identify diamonds in the rough that fit their system. CL is the king of 3 star recruits that play like 5 stars in his system.
Russell Turner would be a great hire. Good system coach doing more with less.
He would be but now that he has beaten KSU the price goes up and so does the interest from other programs looking for a coach. Every win makes it less likely IMO. I hope I'm wrong and that we are going to throw some money into this thing to turn it around but not sure the resources are there.
Actually if you think about it is they are probably better at identifying talent. Picking out a Zion Williamson or even the kid who played at Marysville Pilchuk who signed with the Dawgs...that is easy to spot. The Taylor Rochesties vs Nic Witherils are the harder guys to figure out who can plat at the Pac 12 level.
I agree that it is easy to identify high level talent and very hard to recruit unless you are a blue blood. A MWC or Big West coach really has to find the talent through all of the left overs. There is a whole other category of recruits that Seattle Pacific and Whitman are after. I want somebody that could ID good recruits from all the scraps left behind by the PAC-12 and Big 12's of the world, plugged them into their system and molded them into a team that puts a scare in those same PAC-12 teams. The problem is that class of coach is wanted by many schools with openings. It means Chun has to be a recruiter looking for under the radar, success, not yet identified by the masses coaches.
First off, Seattle Pacific is D-II, Whitman is D-III (D-III schools don't offer scholarships). Correct me if I'm wrong, but at the D-III level, isn't it as much about kids recruiting the school as vice versa? In other words, I want to keep playing ball, who will take me? And D-II is a loooooong way from Pac-12, D-I. Can you imagine hiring a D-II head coach for Football? That would be like hiring a community college coach for baseball. Uh, wait, WSU has done that 3 times out of the last 4 coaches. 4 of 5 if you count Bobo (from YVC).
So I would say no and no to looking at anyone in D-II or D-III.
Recruit doesn't necessarily mean scholarship. Either way I agree to no looking at any coach lower than the mid major level.
