My concern about hiring a 59 year old coach...

[How_did_this_happen?]

What motivation, besides competitive nature, does he have to succeed? Is that motivation driving him hard enough in a very competitive conference?

Why not ride out your career at $1.4M/year and be set up really nice in five years to retire? I'd seriously be tempted to do that.

Just some concerns/thoughts I have about a guy I like and want to succeed...but am not convinced he has the fire in the belly to push hard to win.

Thoughts?

PS I realize that Dick Bennett was ~60 years old when we hired him, but look how burned out he was after a couple of seasons.
This post was edited on 11/2 9:27 PM by How_did_this_happen?

 

[jourdand]

I've had similar thoughts, but so far Kent seems to be energized and pumped up about basketball. Whether he can maintain that through what could be a rough start? Only time will tell. It should also be noted that Dick Bennett never won at WSU. I know many feel it was a done deal when Tony took over but I'm not one of them. I truly don't think Dick would have been capable of doing what Tony did. Tony loosened up the offense and gave just enough freedom for the players to succeed.

 

[SaveFerris]

If Kent is really going 'house-to-house' to sell the program that shows some energy and that this isn't just a paycheck. He was also pushed aside at Oregon (I'm not saying there weren't reasons) so he may have some things to prove. It's just not a given for a 59 year old coach to recruit to Pullman. With Dick he had Tony as 'coach-in-waiting'. This is all on Kent to get done and at this point it's hard to see him as anything more than a caretaker. I think Bone would still have a job if he had done anything to justify it.

 

[ElComanche]

I believe that Kent will coach for another 5-6 years before calling it quits. He seems to renewed and he is probably younger than a few guys here saying that he is too old. I see an upswing in coug basketball beginning this year.

 

[ttowncoug]

Kent's job is to rebuild through recruiting, IMO. That means getting (convincing) 4 star athletes to play here. Klay Thompson was a 4 star kid. Came here because of Bennett.

We need Kent to brand WSU hoops as a place to come get ready for the NBA. If we can do that -- and it might have to include an investment in facilities -- I think we can have some success here.

If the attitude is we will coach up our talent, I'd be more excited if we were going back to "Bennett Ball."

 

[SaveFerris]

Originally posted by ttowncoug:


Kent's job is to rebuild through recruiting, IMO. That means getting (convincing) 4 star athletes to play here. Klay Thompson was a 4 star kid. Came here because of Bennett.

We need Kent to brand WSU hoops as a place to come get ready for the NBA. If we can do that -- and it might have to include an investment in facilities -- I think we can have some success here.

If the attitude is we will coach up our talent, I'd be more excited if we were going back to "Bennett Ball."

Well, we were also Thompson's only Pac 10 offer as well and the Pac 10 was where he wanted to land. GU fans will say they should have offered him but I believe they did and he (Dad?) wasn't interested in the WCC. The LA media was critical of Howland at UCLA for not offering Thompson but the rest of the conference obviously missed as well.

Thompson's success should open the door (did with Q) for others to give WSU a chance but Kent's behind and is still making up time in recruiting. With the results we have seen in this class I would have considered going the JC route for a year but we will see how it works out. Personally, I am not expecting a bunch of 4-star players but getting in on a couple and getting 1 to Pullman over the next year is crucial in my book.

 

[ttowncoug]

With Klay, Michigan and ND offered. Those are pretty good historic basketball schools.

I have a hard time believing "Pac-10" play was the draw. It might have been. Only Klay would know.

My sense all along was his dad convinced him to go learn under Bennett, or a great basketball mind.

 

[SaveFerris]

It was pretty well known 'Pac 10' was the draw. I would assume if Tony had been you know, 'Paul Graham-ish' he would have ended up at ND. So I am not dismissing he was coming into a program that was strong but the rumor was if any other Pac 10 program had offered (especially in California/SoCal) he would have not come to Pullman.

In the end it was probably the best spot he could have landed. It would be for a lot of others as well although of course I am biased.

 

[Coug1990]

Originally posted by jourdand:
I've had similar thoughts, but so far Kent seems to be energized and pumped up about basketball. Whether he can maintain that through what could be a rough start? Only time will tell. It should also be noted that Dick Bennett never won at WSU. I know many feel it was a done deal when Tony took over but I'm not one of them. I truly don't think Dick would have been capable of doing what Tony did. Tony loosened up the offense and gave just enough freedom for the players to succeed.

I am one that does not agree with you. I think Dick built it and had been successful everywhere he had been, including Wisconsin. What really took WSU to the next level was Taylor Rochestie becoming eligible and healthy, Derrick Low becoming healthy and the team maturing.

Kent will be fine. Pete Carroll took over the Seahawks when he was 59. People may have been born in the same year, but not everyone is the same age. Kent is a young 59. He will be fine.

 

[cr8zyncalif]

The issue is not so much age as personality. The right personality will not find it difficult to do what needs to be done or to exert the proper energy even at 59.

IMO, from what I've seen, Ernie's personality is a match for what he is doing.