I realize UC is in Debt but at what point do you make a change?

When he was first hired most people thought 5 years was enough.

Last year it was he should get 1 more year.

At what point do you realize Mick isn't the guy.
6 years no NCAA tournament?
7 years?

Or is UC Athletics in such a financial mess that we are stuck with Mick no matter how he performs?

I am curious to read from Mick's biggest supporters what the time line should be

I'd say this is it IF they don't make the NCAAs, but I"m concerned about the recruiting class if he isn't here. I don't want the team to be rebuilding from scratch again.

That being said, I was at the game yesterday and didn't have a big problem with his coaching decisions. I did think, however, that the officiating was horrible.

MLB, I have NO problem with Mick Cronin's X's and O's ability. He absolutely knows the game.

What I'm dumbfounded with is the CONTINUED inability of his team to grasp what Mick says, and then make the same mistakes over and over. And, mainly because they simply don't seem to listen to him.

He really has to figure this out, or you can count another one who's had it with him. I do agree about losing next year's class, though.

(02-14-2011 10:04 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  MLB, I have NO problem with Mick Cronin's X's and O's ability. He absolutely knows the game.

What I'm dumbfounded with is the CONTINUED inability of his team to grasp what Mick says, and then make the same mistakes over and over. And, mainly because they simply don't seem to listen to him.

He really has to figure this out, or you can count another one who's had it with him. I do agree about losing next year's class, though.

All of that is part of the deal... has to make the NCAAs.

I don't blame him for stupid plays by Bishop, other than having him in the game there. Didn't he throw the ball out of bounds in the DePaul game? He just doesn't seem to be able to perform under pressure. Of course, he hit some big 3's to get UC back in the game yesterday.

Walking a very fine line.

Before you make a change, you better have a plan in place. Not just a plan, but a damn good plan. What a bunch of these loudmouths who want a change for the sake of doing it don't get. Someone give me a buck for every time we see names like Brad Stevens tossed around here in the next month. LOL. Fire him with no quality, realistic options available and lined up at this price and with these ongoing constraints and we are USF and DePaul for the next decade. And that is a fact.

I wasn't joking last week. If Mick is gone, I'd expect Savino or an uninspiring MAC guy with little upper tier recruiting ties to get the nod.

(02-14-2011 10:21 AM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Walking a very fine line.

Before you make a change, you better have a plan in place. Not just a plan, but a damn good plan. What a bunch of these loudmouths who want a change for the sake of doing it don't get. Someone give me a buck for every time we see names like Brad Stevens tossed around here in the next month. LOL. Fire him with no quality, realistic options available and lined up at this price and with these ongoing constraints and we are USF and DePaul for the next decade. And that is a fact.

I wasn't joking last week. If Mick is gone, I'd expect Savino or an uninspiring MAC guy with little upper tier recruiting ties to get the nod.

Yes, Rath. That's the other thing I've been saying/thinking. Who else is walking through that door?

It's too late now but I thought last year made the most sense for a change. Give the new coach a year to recruit 5-7 new players for the class of 2011.

As much I hate to say it I don't know if you can let him go after this season and risk losing the solid class he has coming in.

I think next year should be his last year if you don't see improvement.
If the recruits come in and show a lot of promise and the future looks bright you keep him even if they don't make the NCAA tournament.

If they miss the tournament again and players aren't improving he needs to go.

Quote:What I'm dumbfounded with is the CONTINUED inability of his team to grasp what Mick says, and then make the same mistakes over and over. And, mainly because they simply don't seem to listen to him.

I have the same concern.

I don't know if he recruited the wrong kids with no basketball IQ or if he just isn't a leader. First Mike Williams. Vaughn and Bishop last year. Now Gates.

I know Huggins had problems with kids but they either figured it out (Hicks, Bobbitt ...) or they didn't see the court again.

Bishop is a knucklehead. I think he means well, but he gets out over the tips of his skis at the end of games.

We have definitely gotten some kids bad tudes. Vaughn was like this for 2 years. This staff's biggest failing was not over-recruiting his position and keeping him around IMO. But I digress.

Gates has always had a motor issue. I was sort of fine with it (just who he be) until the bad attitude issues kicked in. If I were Mick, I'd fire Yancey's arse....I can lose the last 6 with him or without him. I'd rather compete and lose with guys who have heart and desire than try to win games with a headcase whose attitude has to affect the other 10 guys on the active roster..

PS: I agree Hoops. Lose this incoming class and we going to be dreadful for a couple years. Reason why I think if there is a change they stick with an unproven guy like Savino. Not a super outlook.

I still have not decided on my opinion of Mick's fate. I said this was ther year I needed to see some things. Not necessarily a tournament bid. I demanded effort and energy this year. And BE quality defense. I've gotten that. The bad attitude stuff troubles me more than anything on the court right now.

If Mick doesn't make it will be at the hands of this Senior Class.

You can't sign 6 players in a Class and not have 1 impact player (7 if you count Jason Henry).

This Senior Class has been a huge disappointment.
Bishop and Larry Davis are good subs but not starters.
Wilks isn't a Big East player. Who knows what kind of player Biggie would have been if he didn't have foot problems. I don't think Belton would have panned out even if he stayed healthy

(02-14-2011 10:55 AM)HoopsJunky Wrote:  Who knows what kind of player Biggie would have been if he didn't have foot problems.

I'm in the minority who's always been a Biggie fan. I've always thought he had some potential in the post and was always a matter of mobility. Even with bad wheels, he could always be counted on to alter a shot or two in limited minutes. One certainty: He's never attempted to do what he can't, or shouldn't, do.

(02-14-2011 11:01 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  

(02-14-2011 10:55 AM)HoopsJunky Wrote:  Who knows what kind of player Biggie would have been if he didn't have foot problems.

I'm in the minority who's always been a Biggie fan. I've always thought he had some potential in the post and was always a matter of mobility. Even with bad wheels, he could always be counted on to alter a shot or two in limited minutes. One certainty: He's never attempted to do what he can't, or shouldn't, do.

I also like Biggie. His only fault seems to be that he keeps things in perspective. I sometimes wonder why he wasn't used more frequently in his junior year even with foot/mobility issues. Was the staff trying to keep Gates happy?

My biggest gripe re: X's and O's came at the end of the DePaul game. Why do you take the best free throw shooter on your team and have him take it out of bounds?

(02-14-2011 11:34 AM)QSECOFR Wrote:  My biggest gripe re: X's and O's came at the end of the DePaul game. Why do you take the best free throw shooter on your team and have him take it out of bounds?

AND worst inbounder

So it's year 7, and time for a change. Won't we face losing recruits and player transfers same as if a change was made this year? Only it will be year 7, and we will be facing 2 more years to rebuild. My math skills tell me it will then be year 9.

The basketball program will not survive several more years of low attendance. By year 9, UC will have lost a couple of generations of young Bearcat fans and probably a lot of us to boot.

(02-14-2011 11:41 AM)OneUChoopsfan Wrote:  So it's year 7, and time for a change. Won't we face losing recruits and player transfers same as if a change was made this year? Only it will be year 7, and we will be facing 2 more years to rebuild. My math skills tell me it will then be year 9.

The basketball program will not survive several more years of low attendance. By year 9, UC will have lost a couple of generations of young Bearcat fans and probably a lot of us to boot.

Yep as Rath says, "a fine line."

(02-14-2011 11:41 AM)OneUChoopsfan Wrote:  So it's year 7, and time for a change. Won't we face losing recruits and player transfers same as if a change was made this year? Only it will be year 7, and we will be facing 2 more years to rebuild. My math skills tell me it will then be year 9.

The basketball program will not survive several more years of low attendance. By year 9, UC will have lost a couple of generations of young Bearcat fans and probably a lot of us to boot.

I agree with your point.

The one difference with this year is UC will be signing 6-7 players.
If they pull the trigger after the season they will lose a number of the commits and it will be too late to start over.

Keep him 1 more season and if things aren't better pull the trigger next year.

In the meantime I hope Mike Thomas has a search firm putting out feelers to see what coaches would be interested.

(02-14-2011 12:57 PM)HoopsJunky Wrote:  

(02-14-2011 11:41 AM)OneUChoopsfan Wrote:  So it's year 7, and time for a change. Won't we face losing recruits and player transfers same as if a change was made this year? Only it will be year 7, and we will be facing 2 more years to rebuild. My math skills tell me it will then be year 9.

The basketball program will not survive several more years of low attendance. By year 9, UC will have lost a couple of generations of young Bearcat fans and probably a lot of us to boot.

I agree with your point.

The one difference with this year is UC will be signing 6-7 players.
If they pull the trigger after the season they will lose a number of the commits and it will be too late to start over.

Keep him 1 more season and if things aren't better pull the trigger next year.

In the meantime I hope Mike Thomas has a search firm putting out feelers to see what coaches would be interested.

This I know -- MT will NOT be the person locating a possible next coach.

(02-14-2011 01:01 PM)QSECOFR Wrote:  

(02-14-2011 12:57 PM)HoopsJunky Wrote:  

(02-14-2011 11:41 AM)OneUChoopsfan Wrote:  So it's year 7, and time for a change. Won't we face losing recruits and player transfers same as if a change was made this year? Only it will be year 7, and we will be facing 2 more years to rebuild. My math skills tell me it will then be year 9.

The basketball program will not survive several more years of low attendance. By year 9, UC will have lost a couple of generations of young Bearcat fans and probably a lot of us to boot.

I agree with your point.

The one difference with this year is UC will be signing 6-7 players.
If they pull the trigger after the season they will lose a number of the commits and it will be too late to start over.

Keep him 1 more season and if things aren't better pull the trigger next year.

In the meantime I hope Mike Thomas has a search firm putting out feelers to see what coaches would be interested.

This I know -- MT will NOT be the person locating a possible next coach.

You got some 'splainin' to do Lucy.....