What's more important: a coach who can recruit, or a coach who can actually COACH? Cuonzo recruited the pants off of everybody. But he didn't do much with them, and we fizzled. Mark Fox (your 'retread') took Wyking's recruits and, in one season, improved the conference record by 350%. I'll take plain vanilla who knows how to coach over a flashy recruiter who doesn't, ANY time.
Nothing in Fox’s resume indicates that he coaches any better than Cuonzo. They’re both excellent defensive coaches who struggle to implement/execute efficient offenses. The difference is that one has a higher ceiling, because he can occasionally land some blue chippers, while the other’s ceiling is claustrophobically low, given his long and recorded history of not landing elite talent.
Pretty much working from the lowest bar in history. I mean, it was nice to see the team compete, but there's nothing in his resume to suggest we'll ever be much more than mediocre. Maybe a NCAA appearance every four years? Anyone who think Cuonzo wouldn't have made the same impact or better in year 1 is fooling themselves.
I’m ok with going after transfer and JC players with 1-3 years of eligibility to keep us competitive. If Fox can coach these players, then he will eventually attract the high school players that will fit his system. Good Luck!
Is this a good time to have the most vanilla of old-school, retread coaches who can't recruit? Only time will tell!
What's more important: a coach who can recruit, or a coach who can actually COACH? Cuonzo recruited the pants off of everybody. But he didn't do much with them, and we fizzled. Mark Fox (your 'retread') took Wyking's recruits and, in one season, improved the conference record by 350%. I'll take plain vanilla who knows how to coach over a flashy recruiter who doesn't, ANY time.
Nothing in Fox’s resume indicates that he coaches any better than Cuonzo. They’re both excellent defensive coaches who struggle to implement/execute efficient offenses. The difference is that one has a higher ceiling, because he can occasionally land some blue chippers, while the other’s ceiling is claustrophobically low, given his long and recorded history of not landing elite talent.
Pretty much working from the lowest bar in history. I mean, it was nice to see the team compete, but there's nothing in his resume to suggest we'll ever be much more than mediocre. Maybe a NCAA appearance every four years? Anyone who think Cuonzo wouldn't have made the same impact or better in year 1 is fooling themselves.
It's not an either/or proposition, though... both parts of the job are necessary to be truly successful.
If the tread comes off, just patch the tires.
I’m ok with going after transfer and JC players with 1-3 years of eligibility to keep us competitive. If Fox can coach these players, then he will eventually attract the high school players that will fit his system. Good Luck!
Raise ticket prices. What could go wrong?
Nice write-up and an interesting perspective - thanks.