Would you trade hiring Pitino and wrecking any moral standing of the program for a berth in the NCAA tournament?

A couple of slate-wiping hypotheticals to add: Coach Shaver has moved on in this situation, and we're a year or two out from this scandal. Also, somehow we can afford him.

No. Pitino and others are symbolic of all that is wrong with the game. They are absolute low life's. We can get to the NCAA much easier than that.

I'd rather wear an orange jumpsuit in an ISIS video.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I'm pretty sure there is a middle ground in that scenario. Do you really think W&M of all places would welcome the circus that would follow that hiring? Pitino's era of respectability is gone.

There is always good coaching talent out there. The problem is other schools want good coaches too and are willing to pay much more than W&M. It's not a 1 man show either. Head coaches are dependent on their assistants and W&M pays poorly there as well. We are handcuffed to the mid major model. You hire a successful lower D1/D2 coach or an impressive D1 assistant looking for their shot. That is what we are willing to pay for. Problem with that is that, typically, is we are only a step in their career. It is the life cycle of mid major coaching. Lose and you are fired. Win and get wooed away. Rinse and repeat.

Shaver is in a kind of coaching pergatory, He isn't "sexy" enough to be snatched up by a big program but wins enough and represents the school well enough to last here indefinitely. It amazes me that Shaver has stuck around here with the pay he makes and resources provided. I would think it is often frustrating.

He makes A LOT of money for the W'burg area (more than JL).

Great money, low stress, and phenomenal students makes W&M a very favorable place to coach.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

(09-28-2017 05:19 AM)Tribal Wrote:  He makes A LOT of money for the W'burg area (more than JL).

Great money, low stress, and phenomenal students makes W&M a very favorable place to coach.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

It might be good Williamsburg money, but on the scale of D1 coaches it is average. I'll give you the lower stress part because there isn't the win at all costs attitude in Williamsburg. I would imagine it is very frustrating as a coach to have to work twice as hard to accomplish things that are a given at other schools- having to go around with hat out to pay for standard D1 program needs and recruiting on a shoestring budget. I'm sure coaches love the school, the student athletes, and the area. But budget issues would have to be a source of frustration.

The fact that Tony is the most successful coach in W&M's CAA history and is hovering around least paid coach honors in conference is telling. I don't like the idea, but why do you think so many people suggest a move to the patriot is a good idea? It's because it is more in line with what W&M is willing to invest in its major sports. Many of the midmajor schools that we consider sports level peers have a basketball budget double to what W&M invests. Impressive show of doing more with less, but still a hardship on doing your job and remaining competitive.

It is decent money if you have retired "in spirit" and are taking your employer for a ride.

It is NOT good money if you are still competitive. The stress comes from within.

We are fielding a MBB program without giving it the tools to compete.

I'm much more concerned about assistant salaries than Tony's. Our assistant coaches always seem to get poached.

Sent from my VS500 using Tapatalk

(09-28-2017 07:30 AM)zablenoise Wrote:  I'm much more concerned about assistant salaries than Tony's. Our assistant coaches always seem to get poached.

Sent from my VS500 using Tapatalk

Head coaches, assistant coaches, recruiting budget, scheduling budget. It is all related and all trends towards bottom of CAA level and closer to lower tier D1 numbers. Is the CAA a lower tier basketball conference? I always placed it as a solid midmajor conference, a step or two behind the A10 in competition. Am I wrong there? Some of our conference mates spend that way.

Now, I haven't looked up any numbers other than head coach salary, so I could be completely wrong. My gut says I'm not.

(09-28-2017 07:16 AM)tribeinexile Wrote:  It is decent money if you have retired "in spirit" and are taking your employer for a ride.

It is NOT good money if you are still competitive. The stress comes from within.

We are fielding a MBB program without giving it the tools to compete.

Well said. It's an institutional thing. This is the way the powers to be want it to be. There's no genuine interest in competing at a higher level. They've got bigger fish, in their minds, to fry.

(09-28-2017 07:30 AM)zablenoise Wrote:  I'm much more concerned about assistant salaries than Tony's. Our assistant coaches always seem to get poached.

Sent from my VS500 using Tapatalk

We've had the same three assistant coaches since 2012-13. There are only a handful of D1 programs that have greater continuity than W&M. It's certainly not the pay keeping them here, but I think it is a testament to the way Coach Shaver runs the program.

It is my opinion that the coaching staff does a great job with the resources which they have at their disposal. I wish that there was a way to increase those assets in order to increase the chances of greater success, without having to divide those assets among other programs.

It is a shame that the limitations are quite as severe as they are. Kudos to Tony and his staff for what they manage to accomplish with what they are given. I'm just not sure why they need to work with one hand tied behind their back.

(09-28-2017 01:47 PM)LeadBolt Wrote:  It is my opinion that the coaching staff does a great job with the resources which they have at their disposal. I wish that there was a way to increase those assets in order to increase the chances of greater success, without having to divide those assets among other programs.

It is a shame that the limitations are quite as severe as they are. Kudos to Tony and his staff for what they manage to accomplish with what they are given. I'm just not sure why they need to work with one hand tied behind their back.

I hope Louisville doesn't find out how good a program he runs, and runs it the right way

I can see Louisville getting the death penalty for this one when viewed with their other serious transgressions.

(09-28-2017 03:14 PM)BigTribe3 Wrote:  I can see Louisville getting the death penalty for this one when viewed with their other serious transgressions.

What makes you think that it will go differently than the scandals @ UNC-CHeat? The NCAA makes a lot of money off of the big schools. They have not shown much inclination to kill the golden goose in order to clean things up.

(09-28-2017 03:24 PM)LeadBolt Wrote:  

(09-28-2017 03:14 PM)BigTribe3 Wrote:  I can see Louisville getting the death penalty for this one when viewed with their other serious transgressions.

What makes you think that it will go differently than the scandals @ UNC-CHeat? The NCAA makes a lot of money off of the big schools. They have not shown much inclination to kill the golden goose in order to clean things up.

1) Louisville is a repeat offender, which qualifies them for the death penalty;
2) UNC's issues, while a bad look, aren't as clear an NCAA violation as payola to agents or hiring prostitutes for recruits.

That being said, the death penalty isn't happening. Baylor hoops didn't get the death penalty for their coach trying to cover up a murder. Bama football didn't get it for Albert Means. The NCAA doesn't really want to nuke a program from orbit even when they should.

I find it very hard to believe that anyone would vote yes to consider Pitino as a coach at a WM. I thought it was a joke when I even saw the subject listed. This guy is one of the most corrupt coaches in recent times.

I’d really love to hear the justification from the 7 (at the time I voted) who voted yes.

(09-28-2017 09:37 PM)tribefbfan Wrote:  I find it very hard to believe that anyone would vote yes to consider Pitino as a coach at a WM. I thought it was a joke when I even saw the subject listed. This guy is one of the most corrupt coaches in recent times.

I’d really love to hear the justification from the 7 (at the time I voted) who voted yes.

He's the best coach on the market, and if the goal truly is to make it to the tourney, he gives W&M the best chance. Everyone complains that the admin is holding the program back (apparently the admin is why they can't play defense, or make clutch free throws, or why they crapped away a 6 point lead with a minute left, but I digress), but now we're saying in a hypothetical scenario where everything lines up perfectly for W&M they shouldn't take it? Because he plays by the same rules everyone else in a dirty world plays by?

He doesn't play by the same rules, Rocco. This is precisely why he's in trouble and most other coaches are preparing for the 2017-2018 season. I hope this clears it up for you.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I don't think Rocco's actually in favor of hypothetically hiring him, but the question was "what's the justification?" and that's the justification. Everybody that's posted (rather than voted) so far would agree that the justification is not enough.