|
Post by sunger4222 on Jan 9, 2018 8:20:05 GMT -5
I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the glowing endorsement by Kiraly. I would not be surprised if he was consulted on this hire. Having the endorsement and collaborating with top USA coaches is a big plus for recruiting. So far I have read a lot of positives. He is a trained teacher, an honest to God college professor, his players like him and they do well in the classroom. Those are not small things, and I think they were important in this search. He took over a team with no history, an 0-27 record and an RPI of #268, and in 3 years beat a top 10 team and finished with an RPI of #98, above Maryland with Aird, Northwestern with Davis and Cal with Feller. The jury is out and I understand the desire for a more established name, but there is potential for a lot of upside with this hire. The first test will be his ability to hire a high quality staff. The second test will be getting buy in from current players. The third test will be recruiting this spring.
|
|
|
Post by sunger4222 on Jan 9, 2018 8:21:40 GMT -5
Well said sbvb, Dilly-dilly!
|
|
|
Post by noreaster on Jan 9, 2018 8:29:26 GMT -5
You saw the endorsement from Karch as a good thing? Really. The fourth test will be getting crushed in conference. We know he can coach. How do we know that? He's yet to win 20 matches in any year in a good conference, and his job is now to win 20 matches every year in a great conference. He's coming off a 15-15 season, to replace a coach who won 4 national titles and like 900 matches. He's won 50. Nobody and I mean NOBODY has any idea if he can do this job, and yet they hired him for it. That's the controversy on this pick.
|
|
|
Post by BuckysHeat on Jan 9, 2018 8:50:06 GMT -5
I think you're overrating how much teenage girls value Karch's opinion. He won't be the national team coach by the time they're in the unlikely position to try out for the team. Karch's name means far more to people over 30 than those under 30, especially high school girls. I think you greatly underestimate how much teenage girls of top recruiting age (9th and 10th grade) are star struck and care about the current Olympic team and coach. They are in the now, not projecting forward 3 or even 4 quads. Again, I never said it was the end all, but proximity to the Olympic training gym and association with the Olympic staff can be leveraged to some advantage, however small. Our club has alumni week during winter break, this year there were a couple of current and former AA's in the gym. Nearly every single kid (12-17) there knew who they were and that specific court was filled with spectators. They all know who the olympians are including the coach as well.
|
|
|
Post by jasonr on Jan 9, 2018 9:12:13 GMT -5
I think you greatly underestimate how much teenage girls of top recruiting age (9th and 10th grade) are star struck and care about the current Olympic team and coach. They are in the now, not projecting forward 3 or even 4 quads. Again, I never said it was the end all, but proximity to the Olympic training gym and association with the Olympic staff can be leveraged to some advantage, however small. Our club has alumni week during winter break, this year there were a couple of current and former AA's in the gym. Nearly every single kid (12-17) there knew who they were and that specific court was filled with spectators. They all know who the olympians are including the coach as well. No one said that teenage girls don't know who Karch (or any other Olympian) is, but to think a blurb from him saying Crouch is a good coach is going to sway their opinion on what school to attend is ridiculous. You know who else Karch thinks is a good coach? All the top coaches in the game. It's one thing to say that if Karch was USC's coach it would help recruiting. It's another to say that Karch offering an "atta boy" to Crouch will make an impact on Crouch's ability to recruit at USC. The results remain to be seen, but does anyone really think Crouch is going to bring in more talent than Haley was already getting on a regular basis? Recruiting was never an issue for Haley.
|
|
|
Post by lo4um on Jan 9, 2018 9:13:03 GMT -5
His first course of action: impress Lanier
|
|
|
Post by rainbowbadger on Jan 9, 2018 10:03:19 GMT -5
Last night when I was trying to tell Rainbowspouse who USC hired, I couldn't remember the man's first name, just that it started with a B. Eventually said "Barty Crouch." Rainbowspouse was like, "Are you sure?" Oops.
|
|
|
Post by newbeach on Jan 9, 2018 10:18:50 GMT -5
The recent press releases from Hawaii (replacing Shoji) and Long Beach State (Gimmillaro) were all highly complimentary of the former coaches while introducing the new hires. Apples and oranges because they each chose to step down. I dearly wish USC could have negotiated an end date that allowed Mick to gracefully retire with the full fanfare he deserves. It's such a shame it ended this way. That's the impression everyone is given that they chose to step down. While that may be true, there was some talk of at least one of them being asked to step down. I agree that they should have given Mick the opportunity to step down (and maybe he was but refused to go). Regardless of their differences, USC could have easily said something complimentary and at the very least mentioned his record, trips to the NCAA, years of service etc. They could have given the public the impression that he left on good terms and taken the high road. That would have shown at least a little class given a difficult situation.
|
|
|
Post by tomclen on Jan 9, 2018 10:29:05 GMT -5
Crouch may end up being a very good fit at USC and very successful.
There are major college programs that have hired head coaches with less or no actual head coaching experience. While he didn't exactly turn Portland into the king of NW volleyball, he seems to be greatly admired by the administration and players at Portland.
And you can't blame him for wanting the job, especially given the fact that his wife is a USC alum and has family in SoCal.
But that still doesn't excuse USC's handling of the entire Haley affair. There have been plenty of coaches who have been 'eased' out of their job against their wishes, and often administrations figure out a way to navigate the choppy waters and make both sides look at least respectable. Hell, even the British Parliament and the Queen figured out a way to make Churchill step down when he was adamant about staying.
Not handling this better from the start and then being petty at the end (firing him when he's at the Finals; no respect in the new coach memo) only makes the school look small. But, I guess when you hire an AD with zero experience, you have to expect a fair amount of crap. Just because someone was a gridiron hero doesn't mean I'd hire him to switch out my toilets.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2018 10:33:22 GMT -5
Brent is going to be really good for USC. I think that he is very underrated as a coach, the question will be can he recruit against the top teams in the country. I would think USC sells itself in a lot of cases.
More importantly for the PAC, I would be worried that if they dont begin to increase salaries that the 'splash' candidates are all going to get away from them. There seems to be the air of 'its the PAC 12' so you should want this job for less money than in minneapolis, or pittsburgh, or nashville. BUT coaches are going to go where the money is and the cost of living in LA, the Bay area, and the pacific northwest, isn't exactly cheap. Can you pay less in those areas and keep the best coaches?
|
|
|
Post by dgo on Jan 9, 2018 11:01:16 GMT -5
USC is a top volleyball destination. They hired a coach that is coming off a 15-15 season, including a 6-12 record in the WCC. How does that not seem off base? It takes great coaching to take a terrible program and get them to .500. It takes totally different coaching to take a great program and get to final fours. There is certainly a lot of overlap, but he's just completely unproved at the level that USC should be competing at. I know nothing about him as a person or coach. I just see the hard numbers of the resume. It's a weird choice. Stanford, coming off a national championship, hired a 17-14 coach who didn't make the tournament. True. A coach who was identified in the very first post on the thread speculating about who Stanford would hire and mentioned quite a bit. Even though a few posters were a little surprised by the choice, I don't think anyone considered the hire to be completely out of the blue. Crouch seems to be a little out of the blue. That doesn't mean that he's not a great coach or will not succeed at USC, but many expected USC to go with a more known commodity.
|
|
|
Post by southie on Jan 9, 2018 11:10:42 GMT -5
Anyone care to guess what his salary is going to be compared to Mick's?
|
|
|
Post by volleyguy on Jan 9, 2018 11:26:37 GMT -5
Brent is going to be really good for USC. I think that he is very underrated as a coach, the question will be can he recruit against the top teams in the country. I would think USC sells itself in a lot of cases. More importantly for the PAC, I would be worried that if they dont begin to increase salaries that the 'splash' candidates are all going to get away from them. There seems to be the air of 'its the PAC 12' so you should want this job for less money than in minneapolis, or pittsburgh, or nashville. BUT coaches are going to go where the money is and the cost of living in LA, the Bay area, and the pacific northwest, isn't exactly cheap. Can you pay less in those areas and keep the best coaches? I think the question is whether he can coach and whether he can recruit. And those are very big questions. But I agree with the larger issue: the PAC 12 needs to step it up in terms of women's volleyball. The B1G has shown that it is all in, and will only widen the gap.
|
|
|
Post by Sorry Ass Sal on Jan 9, 2018 11:31:06 GMT -5
Brent is going to be really good for USC. I think that he is very underrated as a coach, the question will be can he recruit against the top teams in the country. I would think USC sells itself in a lot of cases. More importantly for the PAC, I would be worried that if they dont begin to increase salaries that the 'splash' candidates are all going to get away from them. There seems to be the air of 'its the PAC 12' so you should want this job for less money than in minneapolis, or pittsburgh, or nashville. BUT coaches are going to go where the money is and the cost of living in LA, the Bay area, and the pacific northwest, isn't exactly cheap. Can you pay less in those areas and keep the best coaches? I think the question is whether he can coach and whether he can recruit. And those are very big questions. But I agree with the larger issue: the PAC 12 needs to step it up in terms of women's volleyball. The B1G has shown that it is all in, and will only widen the gap. He took a winless team, won 55 games in four years (only seven in year one), and in two years won the most games since 1991. Say what you will about this hire, but he clearly did something right at Portland.
|
|
|
Post by southie on Jan 9, 2018 11:54:19 GMT -5
Anyone care to guess what his salary is going to be compared to Mick's? Don’t you love how the firing of Mick Haley has bigfan so upset! It might be the greatest part of his firing. Christmas came early this season!
|
|