Bear Down Wildcats

When the dust settles, those are the four I expect to earn bids this year. AZ and Stanford will battle for that fourth one.

51.9% - 83.3% - 41.4%

solid first five games - i suspect those numbers wont maintain.

however, if they do, they are all Pac12 first team and All-American consideration like numbers.

97cats wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 1:19 pm 51.9% - 83.3% - 41.4%

solid first five games - i suspect those numbers wont maintain.

however, if they do, they are all Pac12 first team and All-American consideration like numbers.

The crazy part is that he's shooting 10-16 from 3 in two games.

The other 3 games, he's 2-13 from 3. I'm hoping he settles into a more consistent 38-40% from 3. He's probably our primary shooter, so it's not a huge shock that his 3 bad games were our close games and the 2 good ones were blowouts

Actually, looking further, 3 point shooting is pretty much what defines our margin of victory.

In Grambling, EWU and UTEP, we shot 12-49 from 3.

In NAU and CSB, we shot 25-50 from 3.

There are other stats that vary up and down, but none quite as dramatically. We're literally 2x as good at shooting 3's in the games we've won by >20 as we are in games we've won by <20.

We've had slightly better assist #'s in the games we've won, and better overall shooting #, both of which are consistent with hitting more threes.

97cats wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 1:19 pm 51.9% - 83.3% - 41.4%

solid first five games - i suspect those numbers wont maintain.

however, if they do, they are all Pac12 first team and All-American consideration like numbers.

Dare I say... Allonzo Trier-esque shooting

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 1:41 pm Actually, looking further, 3 point shooting is pretty much what defines our margin of victory.

In Grambling, EWU and UTEP, we shot 12-49 from 3.

In NAU and CSB, we shot 25-50 from 3.

There are other stats that vary up and down, but none quite as dramatically. We're literally 2x as good at shooting 3's in the games we've won by >20 as we are in games we've won by <20.

We've had slightly better assist #'s in the games we've won, and better overall shooting #, both of which are consistent with hitting more threes.

I'm at a point where I really don't like being reliant on excellent 3 point shooting to win games. Unless we've got Salim on the roster, 3 point shooting is going to be very hot and cold. I've seen too many AZ players/teams who can't miss one night and then can't throw it in the ocean the next.

I think a more balanced offense, with outstanding FT shooting, is a much better place to be.

YoDeFoe wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 4:57 pm

97cats wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 1:19 pm 51.9% - 83.3% - 41.4%

solid first five games - i suspect those numbers wont maintain.

however, if they do, they are all Pac12 first team and All-American consideration like numbers.

Dare I say... Allonzo Trier-esque shooting

Trier also had a much shorter 3 point line to do it.

I love how we learn a game has been cancelled by turning to the channel and some random replay is on instead of the game. UCLA/LBSU The latest game to be preempted by football replays.

ByJoveByJingle wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 7:06 pm I love how we learn a game has been cancelled by turning to the channel and some random replay is on instead of the game. UCLA/LBSU The latest game to be preempted by football replays.

Heard about the UCLA game this morning.

azgreg wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 7:13 pm

ByJoveByJingle wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 7:06 pm I love how we learn a game has been cancelled by turning to the channel and some random replay is on instead of the game. UCLA/LBSU The latest game to be preempted by football replays.

Heard about the UCLA game this morning.

That’s what I get for working.

Beachcat97 wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 6:48 pm

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 1:41 pm Actually, looking further, 3 point shooting is pretty much what defines our margin of victory.

In Grambling, EWU and UTEP, we shot 12-49 from 3.

In NAU and CSB, we shot 25-50 from 3.

There are other stats that vary up and down, but none quite as dramatically. We're literally 2x as good at shooting 3's in the games we've won by >20 as we are in games we've won by <20.

We've had slightly better assist #'s in the games we've won, and better overall shooting #, both of which are consistent with hitting more threes.

I'm at a point where I really don't like being reliant on excellent 3 point shooting to win games. Unless we've got Salim on the roster, 3 point shooting is going to be very hot and cold. I've seen too many AZ players/teams who can't miss one night and then can't throw it in the ocean the next.

I think a more balanced offense, with outstanding FT shooting, is a much better place to be.

Two thoughts. First, for all the criticism of Miller not being modern, the emphasis on either shooting 3's or dunks/layups and NOT midrange shots is a pretty modern philosophy.

Next, my positive take is that we seem to know to shoot 3's less when we're not hitting. We've taken 16.3 threes a game when shooting poorly and 25 threes a game when shooting well.

That's what you want to see. Shoot more when they're going in. Games like UTEP, when you miss everything, we only took 9 threes, drove the ball hard, picked up fouls, made FT's and won. That's a solid approach.

I guess waiting till this morning to post the cal baptist game thread wasn't waiting long enough.
::::

oh and thanks chi for the heads up on that

They had to be in McKale getting ready to warm up. So they passed a test at home and then failed one here?

Jefe wrote: Mon Dec 07, 2020 3:09 pmHow much are we paying these teams to come play us? Do they get paid before showing up?

$60K

I think Cal Poly was paid $85K a couple years ago, so tough times in the AD for both schools.

If Keyontae Johnson's heart issue is indeed a result of him having Covid over the summer than they need to shut the whole thing down.

Jefe wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 2:59 pm

Jefe wrote: Mon Dec 07, 2020 3:09 pmHow much are we paying these teams to come play us? Do they get paid before showing up?

$60K

We don't kick them anything even though they traveled to Tucson?

They get a free Eegees for the bus ride home

Does the player stay here to quarantine? Rent him a car?

Alieberman wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 4:42 pm They get a free Eegees for the bus ride home

Kick in some Buffalo Ranch Fries

https://www.google.com/amp/s/syndicatio ... l.amp.html


☰

Duke's Mike Krzyzewski and North Carolina's Roy Williams Gerry Broome/Associated Press
Ranking the Best Coaching Jobs in College Basketball

KERRY MILLER
DECEMBER 15, 2020
A basketball coach rubs a magic lamp and a genie pops out, granting him one wish to become the head coach of the men's college basketball program of his choice.

Where does he go?

Based on a combination of history (both recent and ancient) at the school, the program's culture/fans and recruiting pull, we've ranked the most attractive jobs in the sport.

Two key things of note that we're not factoring into the mix:

How the team is doing thus far this season. Duke, Indiana and especially Kentucky have struggled in the past few weeks, but a slow start in one season doesn't fundamentally change a job's allure.
The FBI situation lingering like a ticking time bomb. Several of these programs have been implicated in the shoe industry scandal that first surfaced in 2017, but we're not going to devalue the Arizona, Kansas or Louisville jobs just because there might be sanctions in the future. At any rate, that unknown didn't stop Chris Mack from leaving Xavier for Louisville three summers ago.
One last note: Try not to get too upset about the order of the top four. Duke, Kansas, Kentucky and North Carolina are clearly in a tier of their own, and we're splitting hairs to put them in some sort of hierarchy. It was tempting to just call it a four-way tie.


Honorable Mentions


Michigan State head coach Tom Izzo Paul Sancya/Associated Press
Michigan State

Michigan State has been an annual contender for more than two decades, but the Spartans have only had one top-10 recruiting class in the past decade. Tom Izzo has done an incredible job with a seemingly endless string of upperclassmen leaders, and this would obviously be a coveted position if it opened up. There are places better suited for immediate success, though.



Villanova

Jay Wright has certainly stepped up his recruiting game in the past few years, putting together top-10 classes in both 2018 and 2019.

Similar to Michigan State, though, this seems like more of a "great coach in a good place" situation that an "any above-average coach could thrive at that program" situation. And if the new coach isn't keen on shooting a lot of threes while playing at a slow pace, he will be pretty much starting over from scratch. At least the Philadelphia market has a lot of talent to tap into, though.



Gonzaga

Over the past decade, the Zags have transitioned from a great mid-major team to just a straight-up great team. There's now legitimate NBA talent on that roster year in and year out, and it definitely feels like Mark Few has built something that could continue to thrive even after he moves on to whatever's next in his career.



Florida

This is the best job in a talent-rich state and the second-best gig in the SEC (behind Kentucky). Billy Donovan's run from 1999-2014 was no fluke. This really should be an NCAA tournament-bound team ranked in the Top 25 every year. The Gators do usually recruit well, but they could do much better in that regard.



Ohio State

This was definitely a top-10 gig not that long ago. There's a lot of basketball history in Columbus, and from 2006-13, the Buckeyes were either a No. 1 or No. 2 seed in the NCAA tournament six times in eight years.

But the combination of diminished recruiting pull and Thad Matta's less-than-ceremonious exit during the summer of 2017 has brought Ohio State back to the pack a bit. Chris Holtmann has done an impressive job since taking the reins, though.



UNLV

UNLV has been a mess in recent years, but the Rebels can still attract substantial talent to the desert. This program is something of a sleeping giant just waiting for the right coach to come in and bring back the glory days.



Oregon

The birthplace of Nike doesn't have a particularly rich or deep history of basketball success. Oregon has only been to one Final Four since winning it all in 1939, and it has never been ranked higher than No. 4 in the AP poll.

But over the past couple of years, Dana Altman has turned Eugene, Oregon, into a popular destination for both 5-star recruits and coveted transfers. We wouldn't call the Ducks a Pac-12 juggernaut yet, but they're getting close.


9. Texas


Shaka Smart Kathy Kmonicek/Associated Press
It's hard to understand how Texas has only been to one Final Four since 1947, or how it has only spent two weeks at No. 1 in the AP poll throughout program history.

The Longhorns have plenty of recruiting pull (see: Kevin Durant, LaMarcus Aldridge, Mo Bamba, Myles Turner and a dozen other 5-star recruits dating back to 2004). But whether it has been Rick Barnes or Shaka Smart running the show, "underwhelming" is probably the most fitting word one could use to describe what this program has accomplished year after year.

But we might be underselling the Texas job at No. 9 because it's kind of the perfect combination of talent pipeline and realistic expectations that could allow a coach to get comfortable for a long time.

Texas fans will be ready to run an underdelivering football coach out of town midway through his first season, but they don't demand immediate greatness on the hardwood. However, it's a place where a coach could thrive right away and where he could become the greatest in program history in short order.

At every other program in our top eight, your best-case scenario after five years is getting the fans to say something like, "Oh, he's good, but he's no [insert legendary coach who made multiple trips to the Final Four during his more than two decades with the team]."

At Texas, though, turn a few top-10 recruiting classes into teams that finish the season ranked in the Top 10 and you're at least in the mix with Barnes for the best the Longhorns have ever had on the sideline.


8. Arizona


Sean Miller Rick Scuteri/Associated Press
Bobby Hurley has come on strong in recent years with Arizona State, but for the longest time, Arizona had the luxury of being the destination for top-100 recruits willing/wanting to spend their college days in the southwest.

Lute Olson (Arizona's coach from 1983-2007) didn't need to venture far to see/attract guys from Las Vegas, southern California or western Texas, and he capitalized on that proximity to talent by building a program that spent at least one week ranked in the AP Top 10 in 20 consecutive seasons.

The first two years after Olson retired, things didn't go all that well under Kevin O'Neill or Russ Pennell. But it didn't take long for Sean Miller to put Arizona back on the national radar as a title contender.

Similar to Texas, some lot of NCAA tournament good that has done for this program lately. Arizona hasn't been to the Final Four since 2001 and has only ever won one national championship (1997).


Top 10 job and UCLA is right above us.

How is UCLA a better job than AZ again? Feels like that hasn't been true for a looooooong time.

Beachcat97 wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 10:21 pm How is UCLA a better job than AZ again? Feels like that hasn't been true for a looooooong time.

In all fairness, the UA shouldn't be rated all that high either. Only FF appearance by an Arizona team in the last 2 decades was 2001. UCLA has 3, last one 2008.

But outside of records, UCLA should be a better job. Beautiful campus, right in the middle of a great recruiting hotbed, with better weather, beaches, and other activities that Tucson cannot compete with.

Merkin wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:33 am

Beachcat97 wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 10:21 pm How is UCLA a better job than AZ again? Feels like that hasn't been true for a looooooong time.

In all fairness, the UA shouldn't be rated all that high either. Only FF appearance by an Arizona team in the last 2 decades was 2001. UCLA has 3, last one 2008.

But outside of records, UCLA should be a better job. Beautiful campus, right in the middle of a great recruiting hotbed, with better weather, beaches, and other activities that Tucson cannot compete with.

AZ has shown for a long time now that it can draw elite talent (ie: first round draft picks) as often as any program not named Kentucky or Duke. We can pay as much or more than UCLA. Beautiful campus, excellent location for recruiting, and a lot of coaches out there may prefer the golf/resort lifestyle more than SoCal beaches. A 4 to 5 million dollar salary is going to go MUCH further in Tucson than in L.A., so there's that too.

UCLA has us on the weather; it's true. But aside from that, I think the AZ job has moved ahead of UCLA. I didn't even mention UCLA's piss-poor fan support, compared to AZ's yearly dominance in hoops attendance. I like Sean Miller as a coach more than UCLA's last two hires (Alford, Cronin), and if you'll recall, UCLA was unable to lure it's top targets after firing Alford. Think they went after Bennett, Shaka, Barnes, Stevens, and maybe a couple others I'm forgetting. Cronin was basically a Plan F, after being told no by several others. That's telling.

AZ's next coaching search, whenever it comes, will give us more evidence on this question. Can we land one of our top targets, or will we go through what UCLA just did, having to settle for a distant backup option?

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 7:41 pm

Beachcat97 wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 6:48 pm

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 1:41 pm Actually, looking further, 3 point shooting is pretty much what defines our margin of victory.

In Grambling, EWU and UTEP, we shot 12-49 from 3.

In NAU and CSB, we shot 25-50 from 3.

There are other stats that vary up and down, but none quite as dramatically. We're literally 2x as good at shooting 3's in the games we've won by >20 as we are in games we've won by <20.

We've had slightly better assist #'s in the games we've won, and better overall shooting #, both of which are consistent with hitting more threes.

I'm at a point where I really don't like being reliant on excellent 3 point shooting to win games. Unless we've got Salim on the roster, 3 point shooting is going to be very hot and cold. I've seen too many AZ players/teams who can't miss one night and then can't throw it in the ocean the next.

I think a more balanced offense, with outstanding FT shooting, is a much better place to be.

Two thoughts. First, for all the criticism of Miller not being modern, the emphasis on either shooting 3's or dunks/layups and NOT midrange shots is a pretty modern philosophy.

Next, my positive take is that we seem to know to shoot 3's less when we're not hitting. We've taken 16.3 threes a game when shooting poorly and 25 threes a game when shooting well.

That's what you want to see. Shoot more when they're going in. Games like UTEP, when you miss everything, we only took 9 threes, drove the ball hard, picked up fouls, made FT's and won. That's a solid approach.

So, I'll double down on the above. UTEP beat ASU last night with ASU shooting 1-19 from 3.

We won despite a similarly poor shooting night by attacking when shots weren't falling. ASU lost by 13 by continuing to fire away.

I'm cautiously optimistic that we have the makings of something good.

Edit: UTEP also murdered ASU on the glass. D, Rebounding, lack of TO's and getting to the line can win a lot of games when you don't play well.

Any idea who were trying to add as an opponent for Monday?

Merkin wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:33 am

Beachcat97 wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 10:21 pm How is UCLA a better job than AZ again? Feels like that hasn't been true for a looooooong time.

In all fairness, the UA shouldn't be rated all that high either. Only FF appearance by an Arizona team in the last 2 decades was 2001. UCLA has 3, last one 2008.

But outside of records, UCLA should be a better job. Beautiful campus, right in the middle of a great recruiting hotbed, with better weather, beaches, and other activities that Tucson cannot compete with.

This. The real question is how is UCLA not a better job than Arizona? To me UCLA is a sleeping giant that could arise at any time just like they did with Westbrook and Love equating to 3 straight Final Fours; something Arizona has never done. Arizona really hasn't been that relevant for almost 2 decades with zero Final Fours to prove it. And UCLA has so much more history and tradition. Personally I don't think they ever should have fired Ben Howland. I could care less about conference championships in a historically top heavy conference. UCLA only hangs national championship banners. All eleven of them. We have one. There's no comparison. UCLA is by far the better job.

So when are you going to start posting as a huge fan over at BruinsNation?

I mean, your sockpuppet career here has obviously run its course...

Captain Obvious wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 6:22 pm

Merkin wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:33 am

Beachcat97 wrote: Wed Dec 16, 2020 10:21 pm How is UCLA a better job than AZ again? Feels like that hasn't been true for a looooooong time.

In all fairness, the UA shouldn't be rated all that high either. Only FF appearance by an Arizona team in the last 2 decades was 2001. UCLA has 3, last one 2008.

But outside of records, UCLA should be a better job. Beautiful campus, right in the middle of a great recruiting hotbed, with better weather, beaches, and other activities that Tucson cannot compete with.

This. The real question is how is UCLA not a better job than Arizona? To me UCLA is a sleeping giant that could arise at any time just like they did with Westbrook and Love equating to 3 straight Final Fours; something Arizona has never done. Arizona really hasn't been that relevant for almost 2 decades with zero Final Fours to prove it. And UCLA has so much more history and tradition. Personally I don't think they ever should have fired Ben Howland. I could care less about conference championships in a historically top heavy conference. UCLA only hangs national championship banners. All eleven of them. We have one. There's no comparison. UCLA is by far the better job.

Yeah, except our one NC is more recent than all 11 of UCLA's. We draw sellouts every night. UCLA averaged 6,187 in a 13,800 seat arena last year.

UCLA has great history and is in a rich recruiting talent area. All other aspects of the program, we lead them in.

During the Lute era, Arizona overtook UCLA as the preeminent program out west. Yes, UCLA won the title in '95, but AZ won it two years later in '97. During the second half of the 80's, throughout 90's, and during the first half of the 2000's, Arizona was far more consistent, with more final fours, more marquee wins, and a source for being a greater pipeline to the NBA. But then Lute's health started to falter and Howland had a great run with three final fours. Since that time, both programs have been inconsistent, with Miller's best years arguably eclipsing his counterparts at UCLA. Presently, neither is the best program out west, that distinction probably is shared between Gonzaga and Oregon (Altman directly benefitting the most from Arizona's NCAA issues and recruiting snafus).

midnightx wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 7:36 pm During the Lute era, Arizona overtook UCLA as the preeminent program out west. Yes, UCLA won the title in '95, but AZ won it two years later in '97. During the second half of the 80's, throughout 90's, and during the first half of the 2000's, Arizona was far more consistent, with more final fours, more marquee wins, and a source for being a greater pipeline to the NBA. But then Lute's health started to falter and Howland had a great run with three final fours. Since that time, both programs have been inconsistent, with Miller's best years arguably eclipsing his counterparts at UCLA. Presently, neither is the best program out west, that distinction probably is shared between Gonzaga and Oregon (Altman directly benefitting the most from Arizona's NCAA issues and recruiting snafus).

I don't disagree with a word of this, midnight...but this came up in the context of a different question: which is the better coaching job, AZ or UCLA?

UCLA's last two coaching searches tell me everything I need to know about how desirable that job is. Top 10 jobs don't have that kind of problems hiring their top choices. And again, whenever we go through our next coaching change, it'll give a much better sense of the AZ job's current desirability. But for now, I'd take Miller over Alford and Cronin, and it's not even close.

We didn’t get our top choice last time we had a coaching search.

Of course that guy had no business being our top choice but Livengood was an idiot and that’s a whole different story.

Also, let’s not forget that Sean originally turned us down AND had one foot out the door to make what was very much a lateral move at one point.

Chicat wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:27 pm We didn’t get our top choice last time we had a coaching search.

Of course that guy had no business being our top choice but Livengood was an idiot and that’s a whole different story.

Also, let’s not forget that Sean originally turned us down AND had one foot out the door to make what was very much a lateral move at one point.

I'd add that the conventional wisdom had Josh Pastner taking over if Miller had left for Maryland. It's worthwhile not to forget that the two non-Miller options we most likely had in the post-Lute era would have been gigantic dumpster fires.

We did well with Miller, but I think the stuff surrounding that shows how it's just as likely to wind up with a disaster.

Chicat wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:27 pm We didn’t get our top choice last time we had a coaching search.

Of course that guy had no business being our top choice but Livengood was an idiot and that’s a whole different story.

I thought Sean was the only one we ever offered the job to, and that Floyd was interviewed but not offered.

Beachcat97 wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:58 am

Chicat wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:27 pm We didn’t get our top choice last time we had a coaching search.

Of course that guy had no business being our top choice but Livengood was an idiot and that’s a whole different story.

I thought Sean was the only one we ever offered the job to, and that Floyd was interviewed but not offered.

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-baske ... id=4035206

Beachcat97 wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:58 am

Chicat wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:27 pm We didn’t get our top choice last time we had a coaching search.

Of course that guy had no business being our top choice but Livengood was an idiot and that’s a whole different story.

I thought Sean was the only one we ever offered the job to, and that Floyd was interviewed but not offered.

That was the story Livengood tried his hardest to spin because he didn't want anyone to think the mighty Arizona could have been turned down by a guy no fan or booster actually wanted.

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 10:19 am

Beachcat97 wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:58 am

Chicat wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:27 pm We didn’t get our top choice last time we had a coaching search.

Of course that guy had no business being our top choice but Livengood was an idiot and that’s a whole different story.

I thought Sean was the only one we ever offered the job to, and that Floyd was interviewed but not offered.

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-baske ... id=4035206

Fair enough. But that article doesn't prove the job was offered. Whatevs, not a big deal.

I just find it a little strange Floyd wouldn't take the AZ job. At that point, we were for the most part a squeaky clean program with wind in our sails. If he really were offered AZ, that means he turned down the best college job he'll ever be offered. Does that make any sense? Which is more likely, that he turned down a fantastic job, or that the job wasn't really offered to him?

Beachcat97 wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 10:34 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 10:19 am

Beachcat97 wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:58 am

Chicat wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:27 pm We didn’t get our top choice last time we had a coaching search.

Of course that guy had no business being our top choice but Livengood was an idiot and that’s a whole different story.

I thought Sean was the only one we ever offered the job to, and that Floyd was interviewed but not offered.

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-baske ... id=4035206

Fair enough. But that article doesn't prove the job was offered. Whatevs, not a big deal.

I just find it a little strange Floyd wouldn't take the AZ job. At that point, we were for the most part a squeaky clean program with wind in our sails. If he really were offered AZ, that means he turned down the best college job he'll ever be offered. Does that make any sense? Which is more likely, that he turned down a fantastic job, or that the job wasn't really offered to him?

Dude..., Sean turned us down and he was at a smaller school in a less prestigious conference. Arizona was the best college job he was ever offered and it took John Calipari talking him into reconsidering in an all-night phone call.

Floyd turned us down. It happened. I know it’s a blow to the ego but it’s reality.

Thank god Floyd turned us down!

Beachcat97 wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 10:34 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 10:19 am

Beachcat97 wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:58 am

Chicat wrote: Thu Dec 17, 2020 10:27 pm We didn’t get our top choice last time we had a coaching search.

Of course that guy had no business being our top choice but Livengood was an idiot and that’s a whole different story.

I thought Sean was the only one we ever offered the job to, and that Floyd was interviewed but not offered.

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-baske ... id=4035206

Fair enough. But that article doesn't prove the job was offered. Whatevs, not a big deal.

I just find it a little strange Floyd wouldn't take the AZ job. At that point, we were for the most part a squeaky clean program with wind in our sails. If he really were offered AZ, that means he turned down the best college job he'll ever be offered. Does that make any sense? Which is more likely, that he turned down a fantastic job, or that the job wasn't really offered to him?

Well, the Arizona fanbase also had a very negative reaction to the hire. I tend to believe the basics of that article, which is that we offered, he accepted and the terms were being hashed out.

Then, shit hit the fan publicly and both sides cooled. Or, Floyd started demanding more $ and buyout because of the negative fan reaction and we tried to chop down our offer due to the negative fan reaction. Either way, I think it led to a "you can't fire me, I quit" situation where neither side was interested in doing what needed to be done.

I can accept Tim Floyd turning down the AZ job, lol. It's just strange. Feels like Bill Self turning down Kansas.

Since we're on the topic, how about a list of the best current "west coast" college hoops jobs, provided they were actually available? Even though Arizona and UCLA have recently fallen behind Gonzaga and Oregon (and arguably SDSU) in the pecking order, it's questionable whether Zaga and OU would be more attractive jobs than AZ and UCLA on the open market. What is the best Pac job after AZ, UCLA and Oregon? Maybe Washington? What about smaller schools like LMU and Pepperdine and St. Mary's?

Pretty sure Sean turned down Arizona TWICE.

Beachcat97 wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 11:50 am I can accept Tim Floyd turning down the AZ job, lol. It's just strange. Feels like Bill Self turning down Kansas.

Since we're on the topic, how about a list of the best current "west coast" college hoops jobs, provided they were actually available? Even though Arizona and UCLA have recently fallen behind Gonzaga and Oregon (and arguably SDSU) in the pecking order, it's questionable whether Zaga and OU would be more attractive jobs than AZ and UCLA on the open market. What is the best Pac job after AZ, UCLA and Oregon? Maybe Washington? What about smaller schools like LMU and Pepperdine and St. Mary's?

I'm a homer, but I don't think that Oregon's ahead of us. Altman has been at Oregon one less year than Miller's been here. During that time, Oregon has 1 Final Four, 1 Elite Eight and 2 Sweet 16's. They've won or tied 3 reg season Pac titles and 3 Pac tourney titles with an overall .717 win %.

We have 3 Elite Eights and 2 Sweet 16's. We've won or tied for 5 regular season Pac titles and gotten 3 Pac tourney titles with an overall .744 win % (including Miller's first .500 year). It's somewhat subjective, but we compare favorably in most metrics.

So, Zaga is a tough comparison to AZ or UCLA just because of the WCC. Being very successful in a low major conference is just fundamentally different in my mind in terms of job attractiveness. Some coaches might like it, some not so much.

In Pac jobs, I think UCLA and AZ are tied for #1. Oregon is #2 and then it's a steep drop. UW, Stanford and Cal would be my competitors for third just because of talent proximity.

Midmajor, Zaga is easily #1. I would actually put UNLV ahead of SDSU. UNLV has a lot of potential that's just unrealized. If they get a good coach, like they had for a bit with Lon Kruger, watch out. Then SDSU.

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 12:10 pm

Beachcat97 wrote: Fri Dec 18, 2020 11:50 am I can accept Tim Floyd turning down the AZ job, lol. It's just strange. Feels like Bill Self turning down Kansas.

Since we're on the topic, how about a list of the best current "west coast" college hoops jobs, provided they were actually available? Even though Arizona and UCLA have recently fallen behind Gonzaga and Oregon (and arguably SDSU) in the pecking order, it's questionable whether Zaga and OU would be more attractive jobs than AZ and UCLA on the open market. What is the best Pac job after AZ, UCLA and Oregon? Maybe Washington? What about smaller schools like LMU and Pepperdine and St. Mary's?

I'm a homer, but I don't think that Oregon's ahead of us. Altman has been at Oregon one less year than Miller's been here. During that time, Oregon has 1 Final Four, 1 Elite Eight and 2 Sweet 16's. They've won or tied 3 reg season Pac titles and 3 Pac tourney titles with an overall .717 win %.

We have 3 Elite Eights and 2 Sweet 16's. We've won or tied for 5 regular season Pac titles and gotten 3 Pac tourney titles with an overall .744 win % (including Miller's first .500 year). It's somewhat subjective, but we compare favorably in most metrics.

So, Zaga is a tough comparison to AZ or UCLA just because of the WCC. Being very successful in a low major conference is just fundamentally different in my mind in terms of job attractiveness. Some coaches might like it, some not so much.

In Pac jobs, I think UCLA and AZ are tied for #1. Oregon is #2 and then it's a steep drop. UW, Stanford and Cal would be my competitors for third just because of talent proximity.

Midmajor, Zaga is easily #1. I would actually put UNLV ahead of SDSU. UNLV has a lot of potential that's just unrealized. If they get a good coach, like they had for a bit with Lon Kruger, watch out. Then SDSU.

That's a great breakdown, spiff.

I readily admit being a homer as well, but I still think AZ is the best job, ahead of UCLA for reasons covered upthread. Beyond that, I think it's hard to say whether Oregon or UCLA is *currently* a better job. Altman, like Miller, is a better hire than UCLA's last two, and Oregon has been much more successful and more consistent than UCLA lately.

Gonzaga is an interesting case. They remind me a little of Syracuse and Duke: private schools that have ascended to elite status under one coach. It's hard to say what the post-Boeheim era will look like. Same is true of the post-Few era. It's not easy to just hire a long-time assistant or a promising up-and-comer and not skip a beat. It's unquestionable that Few has made Gonzaga into a first-rate destination program, for both players and coaches. He's also not that old, so it's unlikely that job opens up anytime soon. Syracuse, on the other hand, has to be thinking about the next era. Duke too.

UNLV ahead of SDSU? Really? I get that the Rebels have been better historically, but lately SDSU has been crushing it. They've averaged 26 wins per season since 2010 and have won the MWC six times. This season, they've already beaten UCLA and ASU. SDSU has quietly risen in the west coast pecking order, and I'd put them ahead of many Pac programs at the moment.

Beachcat, to expand, I think you and I approach job rankings differently. You mention recent success. For me, recent success is something, but it's more limited and a double edged sword.

The foundation of my rankings are going to be the raw resources of a program, not so much recent results. That's because a good coach will capitalize on resources. UCLA/Oregon is a good example. LA is a talent hotbed that UCLA is the lead program in. Oregon has nowhere near that talent base and has to recruit nationally.

Now, Altman's done that well, but just purely in terms pf which job is better, UCLA leads by a big margin in that category, IMO. The flip side of recent success is it creates expectations. If Coach X replaces Altman, he has to replicate Altman's success or find himself on the hot seat.

Oregon has Nike money and profile plus great facilities, but nowhere near the prestige, name and location of UCLA or Arizona. That's why from a job perspective, I think it falls behind.

Similarly with UNLV and SDSU. Vegas is a location you can recruit to much easier than SDSU and both schools have facilities significantly better than most mid-majors.

SDSU, they were nothing before Fisher and Dutcher. So they have resources, but I think there's a big difference between success now and program potential. I rate UNLV higher because I feel like a dynamic recruiter can pull top ten classes there and you can't at SDSU.

Sort of similar with UCLA and Oregon. As bad as Alford was, he could pull talent. No one before Altman has recruited like Altman has, but most UCLA coaches have pulled highly ranked classes.