The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

Should Mike Bohn be involved in the open spot on the bench? I don't think this hire should just be a familiar, same ole same ole hire. Need to shake things up.

Mike needs to tell Mick we need to clean house with the assistants. 13 years is way too long, especially with our March failures. And Mike should absolutely be involved in the selection process.

As AD I guess he should have final approval especially if there is an "issue" around a candidate. Maybe even a suggest a candidate if he has some particular insight. But that's about it. ADs should direct athletics and let their coaches coach, including finding their own assistants.

(03-23-2019 01:08 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  As AD I guess he should have final approval especially if there is an "issue" around a candidate. Maybe even a suggest a candidate if he has some particular insight. But that's about it. ADs should direct athletics and let their coaches coach, including finding their own assistants.

I disagree here. Just like in business, positions all have different requirements. Coaching is no different. Coaches have to recruit, hire, develop, coach, train, game plan, etc. A coach, just like a business manager, can be really good in some aspects/phases but not all. Its possible Mick is really bad at interviewing and hiring. If that be the case, and I believe it is, Mike should absolutely recognize this and step in and form a game plan to help. Example: Mick, from now on, I do the second interviews and we don't hire anybody until I have the final say. Maybe they do that now, i don't know. Point is, one can't assume Mick is good in all phases of his job. Clearly he isn't. Most people aren't. Everybody has strengths and weaknesses in their positions at work.

I've worked at some major corporations in management. I've never seen at any level anybody be able to hire someone without multiple interviews and more than one person signing off on the person. Why should this be any different? If I was an AD I sure wouldn't tell all coaches that work for me, "Go hire your people and good luck."

(03-23-2019 05:48 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(03-23-2019 01:08 AM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  As AD I guess he should have final approval especially if there is an "issue" around a candidate. Maybe even a suggest a candidate if he has some particular insight. But that's about it. ADs should direct athletics and let their coaches coach, including finding their own assistants.

I disagree here. Just like in business, positions all have different requirements. Coaching is no different. Coaches have to recruit, hire, develop, coach, train, game plan, etc. A coach, just like a business manager, can be really good in some aspects/phases but not all. Its possible Mick is really bad at interviewing and hiring. If that be the case, and I believe it is, Mike should absolutely recognize this and step in and form a game plan to help. Example: Mick, from now on, I do the second interviews and we don't hire anybody until I have the final say. Maybe they do that now, i don't know. Point is, one can't assume Mick is good in all phases of his job. Clearly he isn't. Most people aren't. Everybody has strengths and weaknesses in their positions at work.

I've worked at some major corporations in management. I've never seen at any level anybody be able to hire someone without multiple interviews and more than one person signing off on the person. Why should this be any different? If I was an AD I sure wouldn't tell all coaches that work for me, "Go hire your people and good luck."

I agree with Bearhawkeye on this one. Mick's job is to find and hire his coaches. Major issues or concerns, yes Bohn should weigh in and yes, in a healthy relationship Mick should discuss things with Bohn before hiring. But if Mick's hires are that big a concern and he won't or can't see Bohn's view then Mick, like any exec, should be let go. I work for a very large organization and I make my hires. I let my team interview the last two candidates but if they don't agree with my opinion, I win. Because ultimately it's my butt on the line, not my boss's or my team's.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

(03-23-2019 05:48 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Point is, one can't assume Mick is good in all phases of his job. Clearly he isn't. Most people aren't. Everybody has strengths and weaknesses in their positions at work...

But we should just assume Mike Bohn has some innate talent at hiring basketball assistants? Because he played football and baseball in college?

Even if Mick isn't fired (and he won't be nor should he be), he's the one ultimately accountable who takes the hits from the fans (just peruse this board) and critics. If he isn't getting what he needs from his assistants he has all the motivation and responsibility to make a change. Let your second all-time winningest coach do his job and judge him by the results compared to expectations (obviously opinions will differ here as they always do). But don't try to micromanage him especially when the AD has no particular basketball expertise that I've ever heard about.

Not to mention Cronin runs by far the most successful program in the athletic department. If Bohn has to micromanage him he's going to be a busy guy micromanaging every coach and isn't going to be able to attract good candidates for open jobs.

Sent from my LG-H872 using Tapatalk

We definitely need to go outside the bubble with this assistant coaching hire. Some new blood, with some new ideas and hopefully some recruiting ability. It would be good for everyone.

Is there even an open spot? I thought Greg Y replaced Larry Davis after his airline episode.

(03-23-2019 03:39 PM)crex043 Wrote:  Is there even an open spot? I thought Greg Y replaced Larry Davis after his airline episode.

This. There isn’t an open position.

(03-23-2019 03:39 PM)crex043 Wrote:  Is there even an open spot? I thought Greg Y replaced Larry Davis after his airline episode.

He is an interim assistant coach, not a permanent replacement. But he will reportedly be given serious consideration for the role, along with a national search for a replacement.

Mick runs the ship and will not hire someone who will suggest alternate possibilities - err! Questions his decisions.

(03-24-2019 10:39 AM)Romell Shorter Wrote:  Mick runs the ship and will not hire someone who will suggest alternate possibilities - err! Questions his decisions.

I get that you were trying to make this into a Mick "burn", but do you really think most coaches, including Coach K, Roy W, Izzo, Wright, etc. fill their staffs with guys who have a different philosophy than theirs? Sure it's nice to have a guy with some creative input to speak up, but it's a fine line between constructive comments and insubordination. I'd bet most coaches are more about paying lip service to wanting to have an assistant who will challenge him than actually wanting to have their decisions frequently questioned by their staff. There are different plans that can achieve success, but ultimately the goal for each individual team is to have one unit all on the same page and following the same plan. I think we're all for adding an assistant with skills that we need to improve the team either in recruiting or actual skill coaching, but it's probably not going to work if he doesn't share most of the same overall philosophies as the HC.

(03-24-2019 12:48 PM)Bearhawkeye Wrote:  

(03-24-2019 10:39 AM)Romell Shorter Wrote:  Mick runs the ship and will not hire someone who will suggest alternate possibilities - err! Questions his decisions.

I get that you were trying to make this into a Mick "burn", but do you really think most coaches, including Coach K, Roy W, Izzo, Wright, etc. fill their staffs with guys who have a different philosophy than theirs? Sure it's nice to have a guy with some creative input to speak up, but it's a fine line between constructive comments and insubordination. I'd bet most coaches are more about paying lip service to wanting to have an assistant who will challenge him than actually wanting to have their decisions frequently questioned by their staff. There are different plans that can achieve success, but ultimately the goal for each individual team is to have one unit all on the same page and following the same plan. I think we're all for adding an assistant with skills that we need to improve the team either in recruiting or actual skill coaching, but it's probably not going to work if he doesn't share most of the same overall philosophies as the HC.

x 1000

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

I would like to see an assistant with niche recruiting skill, such as recruiting international players or getting transfers. The Mullin has an assistant at St Johns, who was at Iowa State that was key to ISU getting all of those transfers when Hoiberg was there. Someone like that.

Mick's recruiting isn't all that bad... for what he's trying to accomplish. We will never have multiple studs in the 5 spot because that doesn't play into Mick's desire to press and play at as faster pace. That means if we have 2 studs at 5 you're asking them to split time. Not something that tends to happen a lot at non-elite schools.
Likewise with a pure shorter... most are not going to play D the way Mick wants it. Too hard on the legs and the shot.
As a fan base we have begged for more offense and said we'd be happy giving up some of the D to get it... even if it meant losing another game or two because it would prepare is better for March. That's not a view I've held, I still believe D wins games more often than O but that's a different debate. The challenge is that Mick's choice has been D and now he's trying to walk the tightrope of how much offense will work in his scheme.
IMO, most of our loses this year, including Iowa, had much more to do with Mick in game decisions than player talent. UC have more than enough talent this year to be a Sweet 16 team if 2 or 3 different decisions were made on Friday.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

bulldog

(03-24-2019 02:19 PM)jarr Wrote:  I would like to see an assistant with niche recruiting skill, such as recruiting international players or getting transfers. The Mullin has an assistant at St Johns, who was at Iowa State that was key to ISU getting all of those transfers when Hoiberg was there. Someone like that.

Agree completely about someone with a niche recruiting skill. I'd be very good with either someone with strong ties to international players or on the transfer market. Both are areas we could exploit to upgrade our talent level. It's not happening with recruiting traditional kids coming out of high school.

(03-26-2019 09:18 AM)Marcus Wrote:  

(03-24-2019 02:19 PM)jarr Wrote:  I would like to see an assistant with niche recruiting skill, such as recruiting international players or getting transfers. The Mullin has an assistant at St Johns, who was at Iowa State that was key to ISU getting all of those transfers when Hoiberg was there. Someone like that.

Agree completely about someone with a niche recruiting skill. I'd be very good with either someone with strong ties to international players or on the transfer market. Both are areas we could exploit to upgrade our talent level. It's not happening with recruiting traditional kids coming out of high school.

We've had a ton of international players on the roster over the last couple of years. Hell, we have 3 on the roster right now and tried to bring in that kid from Argentina that instead went to TCU.

(03-26-2019 08:53 AM)Lush Wrote:  bulldog