teddydupay4

Can I get 60 G's for compliling this "list" of sorts on who they should hire?  Why pay an AD and then have a committee go out and look for a coach.  Isn't that his job?  Can the guy at Ray's Trash go get homeless guys to actually pick up the garbage while he sits in Classy Chassie sipping scotch and eating an omelette?  Greenspan is an idiot...unless he sends my check in the mail after this post, pronto...These are just a few candidates, and then my choice at the end...

The Big Names:

Rick Pitino:  I'm sure he has the ego for it.  He repaired Kentucky, is in the process of making people not cringe at the thought of going to Louisville, and...yeah, that's it.  The Celtics were horrible.  The only problem is, his wife reportedly isn't "fly" (as they say in the hood) on Bloomington and let's be honest, Rick's not old enough to sail THAT ship yet in a relationship.  On top of that, being a mobster in southern Indiana isn't the way to go.  Less funny though, he recruits well, it's a style that isn't played much in the Big 10, thus will likely give opposing teams fits, and Pitino doesn't carry near the baggage Sampson did.  Or even Mike Davis.  Or even later on, Bobby Knight.  To me, this is a guy in Coach K's class.

Bruce Pearl:  Members of the vaunted "search committee" were in attendance at the UT-UL game last night, and only one of those coaches can they talk to on Saturday as he has no plans.  Pearl has midwest ties, seems to have gotten over his past NCAA transgressions (if that's what you wanna call tattling on someone), and runs an up tempo system at a school that hasn't really embraced men's hoops yet.  The catch is, filling Neyland can pay for whatever coach they want, so IU will hafta either get students to start caring about football in...oh, about a Month (digging up Elvis to play the Spring Game halftime might help)....or count on a booster to pay half Pearl's salary. 

Tom Izzo:  Right.  And Carrie Underwood's coming over to drink with me tonight.

Less Big but still somewhat decent sized names:

Sean Miller: XU clearly is a stepping stone job.  Sorry.  Nevermind that IU has been to ONE sweet 16 since 1995 (seriously) and XU has been to more than that in the last 2 years, it is what it is.  He's a younger guy in a passe environment athletically, so this would be a life change for him career wise. 

Brad Stevens:  Butler.  Another team wearing dark blue and white at a stepping stone job.  Again, it is what it is.  But hell, Butler sure looks good on a resume.  The problem is, Stevens has no coaching experience by comparison and just Indiana ties.  If Indiana ties are all that matters...Michael Jackson was born there....

Steve Alford:  You know an IU coaching search can't be had w/o a mention of everyone in Bloomington's fav shrimpy white guy.

Scott Drew:  Midwest/Indiana ties, clearly doesn't mind taking on jobs where he has no chance of early success, academic restrictions, or the stigma of having to cut checks that say "Baylor" on them.  Also, he's obviously numb to horrible football on his campus.  IU can offer all of those en masse.

Tony Bennett:  Oops!  I forgot.  WSU was that jayvee team masquerading as NC's opponent last night. 

Thad Matta:  Go for it.  But he can't coach.  But he CAN recruit.  Basically a white Mike Davis minus the stuttering.

Miniscule names that deserve a look:

Brad Brownell:  Has Indiana ties and honestly?  Was a damned good coach @ UNC Wilmington before bolting...back to the midwest.  Plus, he's adept at coaching teams with nicknames that people have no idea what it actually is....Hoosier, Seahawks, whatever.

Anthony Grant:  A hot name last year, VCU really did nothing to tarnish his rep.  Of course, he needs another PG that looks like T.I. and plays D like Scottie Pippen, but hey, he can find that somewhere.  This guy one day will be a steal.  He's on the down low because he hasn't just beaten Duke in the first round, so maybe you can get him at a bargain.

Jamie Dixon:  This might fall into the 2nd category, him being @ Pitt...but honestly, who knows who he is?  The things he's done there are pretty decent.  He's not been a great NCAA tourney coach, but so few are.  IU fans would embrace his hard nosed, lockdown style.  He doesn't have incredible recruiting classes, but he still wins.  Gotta respect that crap.

Dave Rose:  Going waaaaaaay into the archives with this one.  Not related to Jalen.  Or Derek.  He overachieves.  Does community service.  Likes small animals and flowers.  Scratch golfer.  What's not to like?  Not a hot name, but one that you can guarantee legit coaching and success with.

The pick....

Scott Drew, Baylor:  Why?  A few reasons.  The Drew name still resonates in Indiana.  When the word "Homer" is mentioned, only in Indiana do you not think of Bart's father or an SEC fan.  You think of the Drews.  Instantly, he could pull a few kids to IU that might not otherwise be considering them.  And he can coach.  Baylor isn't winning b/c over his 5 year plan he's gotten talent, its coaching.  Do you realize that when he started, Baylor didn't even play OOC games?  So recruiting against the odds isn't foreign to him at all.  He plays a style that is fundamentally sound (which IU types, even though most of them wouldn't know a 1-3-1 trap if it bit them in the balls, just claim intelligence based on the fact that they've been watching New Castle high school games for 50 years) that would go over well with the locals.  And he's young.  Proven young guys are hard to find.  This could be a 20-30 year hire, and honestly, that's what IU is looking for.  Another Bob Knight minus the late career tantrums.  Stability.  Pitino for 5 years before he hangs em up isn't gonna offer that.  All this being said, I don't think they'll snag this guy.

I know the cliche statements.  It's hard to pick the field of 65.  It's tough when the games essentially end 3 minutes before the brackets are announced.  How no matter what year, someone will always feel snubbed, left out, like the fat girl at prom...alone and without anything to do that weekend.  But this year takes the cake.  Most years, they do a capable job.  This year?  Wow.  And a few reasons why they need to institute a no alcohol policy in the selection room....

1. Butler.  I know what you're thinking "I've seen people complain about this enough.  What's this guy's angle?"  The South Alabama thing is dirty.  Very.  Putting Butler on the road against a lower seed and then saying "only the top 4 seeds are protected."  What the hell does that mean?  Here's my issue...Butler is ranked in the top 10 and has been hovering around that mark really since the first month of the season.  By giving them a 7 seed, you're basically saying that Butler is at BEST, the 25th best team in the nation.  Am I the only one who doesn't see this and wonder about it?  Who's Cheerios did Brad Stevens piss in?

2. Answers.  I watched Tom O'Connor fumble over his words last night like he was just dying to say "look, these coaches slipped me 50s and paid for my Champagne room experience so their teams are in.  Happy now?"  Among gems of his..."we don't look at what happens in the conference." (regarding ASU).  Hell then, why even play conference games?  They must not matter, the selection committee doesn't look at them.  Why bother ASU?  In fact, next year just get blown out by Arizona, barely finish above .500, blame it on injuries and tough scheduling (wow, does this not sound like NCAA football here) and you'll be just fine getting in.  When it comes down to it, you find out which teams are better than others in one way....not RPI, not SOS...but head to head.  I don't understand why Tom O'Connor is so stupid that he does not realize it.

3. Virginia Tech and Villanova.  Here I have some issues.  Untapped ones at that.  My case for Va Tech is that they finished out the season better.  Both teams were playing conference tourney games that were "play in" of sorts in that if they lost, they had no shot.  Both teams blew out the opposition.  One of which is in the dance and the other of which is in the sock hop (NIT).  My issue comes the next round.  Why put teams in just for show?  Villanova has NO chance of knocking off someone respectable.  Because in their 2nd game after whipping the Cuse around the yard, they were beaten like Joumana Kidd by Georgetown...while VT was busy pushing Carolina to the limit, losing on a shot that was more luck than substance.  To me, that says VT right now can compete with the elite and Villanova is there just to fill the field.

4. Kentucky.  Talk about a team that got in based on name alone.  Isn't this what people argue against in football?  Name recognition over substance?  Why did Tom O'Connor say that the main ingredient they looked at was WINS, yet with teams like Arizona and Kentucky, all they did was lose to the respectable teams?  I see the formula now.  Just play good teams...hell, play the Lakers maybe a few times...lose as expected, and it'll get you in.  Yep, that makes a lotta sense.  "Well, they showed they can't compete with elite teams, but hell...they tried.  So they get a participation ribbon."  Somewhere, parents with kids they know are going nowhere in life are saying "great, now I can convince my son it really IS okay to be a loser."

5. Everything that's wrong.  People love the college hoops system, but the truth is this week we were treated to first hand knowledge that it's about as foolproof as the B(C)S.  Georgia did it for me. 4-12 in the conference, lost last 6 regular season games (so the argument of "they were playing well late, thus that justifies it" does not work here), then basically showed up for one weekend the entire frigging season and boom, in the tournament.  Presumably over a team that actually showed something of a pulse for the majority of the year.  And this is justified by what?  The fact that 65 teams get in?  Clearly, the 65 "best teams" don't get in.  And while I admit it's fun to watch and exciting, let's put down the bong and admit it's not "the best system" just the most fun to watch.