BleedBlue87 wrote:When I have a little extra time over the next few days I plan on sending a quick e-mail to all of the advertisers currently on GoLocal, steer them to the fake article and URI's response and then ask them to stop advertising on GoLocal due to their devious reporting. Probably won't do much but figure I would give it shot. GoLocal won't go away until their advertising support does.
Actually just did it. Took about 10 minutes. Here is what I sent and to who in case anyone else wants to join in the fun:
"Hello,
I am respectfully asking that you please cease advertising with GoLocalProv. They have a history of not reporting facts and making up stories. The latest example is the blatant false story about URI's basketball program: http://www.golocalprov.com/sports/uri-p ... -of-pitino
URI has denied the story completely, is questioning the journalistic integrity of GoLocal and has requested the story be taken down. GoLocal has yet to do so. Here is a link: http://gorhody.com/sports/m-baskbl/2017 ... 0402wcaim0
GoLocal will continue to post false and misleading stories as long as advertisers like you support them. Do the right thing and stop advertising with GoLocal.
Why do people think it is so crazy that Thorr kicked the tires on Pitino? His job is to put as many people as possible into the top of the process and then weed them out by whatever criteria he comes up with. The guy has won everywhere, has northeast ties, and would win about a zillion games at URI. Calling his agent is about a million miles from hiring him.
A top booster wanted to make contact with Pitino. Well there were two that fit that description as of 15 years ago, unless they both kicked it, it’s very likely it happened.
rambone 78 wrote:Curiously both ramster and blue man are very quiet......2 of our most frequent posters.
Watching and waiting no doubt.
I don't know about Blue Man. I've seen him lurking. Ramster is protesting the site after he blew his lid at me the other day because I mentioned Brendan Adams in the thread about the 2018-19 rotation. For the record, nobody told him to go away and he is not on timeout. I wish he'd come back. For all his quirks, I like ramster and he brings value to the board.
3 x
"If you build it, they will come." --Us, circa 2011
GBG, someone the other day said I was you. I wanted you to know I considered that a compliment. You know your stuff and you carry yourself in a straightforward common sense way that reminds me of Rod.
He should. One of a kind. He would defend me to the nth degree but he would also tell me to shut up. And I would actually listen.
Needless to say, Rod could have said let’s get that obscure head coach from westbumm f—k and I’d would have been all in, no questions asked. He earned that kind of loyalty in my book
jcru wrote:GBG, someone the other day said I was you. I wanted you to know I considered that a compliment. You know your stuff and you carry yourself in a straightforward common sense way that reminds me of Rod.
Cheers
Ha! Thanks. Rod and I got into some dust ups but I would like to think he came around to the way I look at things. Not that he agreed with me but saw the prism through which I looked at things. I certainly came around on him. I like your takes on stuff like this because I think the biggest problem on this board is the groupthink that builds with momentum. If everyone posted, say, 20 posts about this process based on what was reported, what they knew about basketball, etc BUT they were unable to read other's posts until after they wrote theirs, I think you would come up with a substantially different take on this board. At the same time, it would be a lot more valuable in terms of insight. I am an optimist but am naturally skeptical. It's why people thought I was a troll when Hurley was hired. Because he the son of a Hall of Famer, people assumed he actually could coach in games. So, I questioned the offense and end game sets and other items. All of a sudden I am a troll. Similarly, with this search, I am skeptical of the process. I just want the powers that be to look at this as a 2018-2024 hire not a keep the class together hire. But if you read people's responses....it's because I hate Cox. Anyway...I bet I would enjoy a beer with 95% of the people on here. People just get a little weird at the intersection of anonymity and their favorite sports teams.
On 98.5 during Zoe and Bertrand's show at about 10:45 this morning they spent a few minutes discussing the whole Pitino thing and URI's denial. They are obviously well on the outside looking in but they theorize that where there is this much smoke there is fire and there was some contact. They also said that Pitino had a hand in getting Kellogg hired at UMass while Thorr was 2nd in command and they believe there is some familiarity between the two parties. They said if the reports are true that we have no interest in Pitino "We blew it" and he would have made us the most compelling and interesting team in New England, and how even they would be coving URI Basketball if he was here. They were begging any team in Mass or RI to fire their coach and hire him, because it would be great from a talk radio standpoint. Their interest was purley self serving as they were interested in the spectacle and couldn't care less about the long term progression of the program.
RIFan wrote:On 98.5 during Zoe and Bertrand's show at about 10:45 this morning they spent a few minutes discussing the whole Pitino thing and URI's denial. They are obviously well on the outside looking in but they theorize that where there is this much smoke there is fire and there was some contact. They also said that Pitino had a hand in getting Kellogg hired at UMass while Thorr was 2nd in command and they believe there is some familiarity between the two parties. They said if the reports are true that we have no interest in Pitino "We blew it" and he would have made us the most compelling and interesting team in New England, and how even they would be coving URI Basketball if he was here. They were begging any team in Mass or RI to fire their coach and hire him, because it would be great from a talk radio standpoint. Their interest was purley self serving as they were interested in the spectacle and couldn't care less about the long term progression of the program.
Bertrand is a big Umass person (no pun intended). I actually think he might have some perspective here, albeit that of a UMass person. Zo, who is my guy, might know more about Bangladeshian parliamentary politics than he does about URI basketball.
0 x
"If you build it, they will come." --Us, circa 2011
rambone 78 wrote:Curiously both ramster and blue man are very quiet......2 of our most frequent posters.
Watching and waiting no doubt.
I don't know about Blue Man. I've seen him lurking. Ramster is protesting the site after he blew his lid at me the other day because I mentioned Brendan Adams in the thread about the 2018-19 rotation. For the record, nobody told him to go away and he is not on timeout. I wish he'd come back. For all his quirks, I like ramster and he brings value to the board.
To be fair, Adams’ AAU numbers don’t scream “I’m ready” to me. I haven’t seen nearly enough of him to know if he’s ready to play or not. But Martin is putting up gaudy numbers on a great prep team.
jcru wrote:GBG, someone the other day said I was you. I wanted you to know I considered that a compliment. You know your stuff and you carry yourself in a straightforward common sense way that reminds me of Rod.
Cheers
Ha! Thanks. Rod and I got into some dust ups but I would like to think he came around to the way I look at things. Not that he agreed with me but saw the prism through which I looked at things. I certainly came around on him. I like your takes on stuff like this because I think the biggest problem on this board is the groupthink that builds with momentum. If everyone posted, say, 20 posts about this process based on what was reported, what they knew about basketball, etc BUT they were unable to read other's posts until after they wrote theirs, I think you would come up with a substantially different take on this board. At the same time, it would be a lot more valuable in terms of insight. I am an optimist but am naturally skeptical. It's why people thought I was a troll when Hurley was hired. Because he the son of a Hall of Famer, people assumed he actually could coach in games. So, I questioned the offense and end game sets and other items. All of a sudden I am a troll. Similarly, with this search, I am skeptical of the process. I just want the powers that be to look at this as a 2018-2024 hire not a keep the class together hire. But if you read people's responses....it's because I hate Cox. Anyway...I bet I would enjoy a beer with 95% of the people on here. People just get a little weird at the intersection of anonymity and their favorite sports teams.
Stop puffing yourself up that it had something to do with your unique take on Xs and Os that ruffled feathers here...you only posted after a loss, disappeared for an entire year basically when we were winning games, and then surprisingly re-emerged when we struggled again. That is the only reason your motives are questioned, no matter what type of fan you are (cynic or optimist) that behavior is not normal and leaves you susceptible to criticism. In terms of your Xs and Os takes, fwiw, you were wrong on just about every one. So there's that.
I guess it depends on how the Shrewsberry interview goes.
True. I’m a big Celtics fan and everyone loves and respects him. The problem is that he’s not a college coach, so he wouldn’t have any recruits to bring with him should anyone choose not to stay. It would be odd to hire someone with no experience when you have Cox and our recruits right in front of you.
Anyone know if Becker got an interview? I can’t remember
jcru wrote:GBG, someone the other day said I was you. I wanted you to know I considered that a compliment. You know your stuff and you carry yourself in a straightforward common sense way that reminds me of Rod.
Cheers
Ha! Thanks. Rod and I got into some dust ups but I would like to think he came around to the way I look at things. Not that he agreed with me but saw the prism through which I looked at things. I certainly came around on him. I like your takes on stuff like this because I think the biggest problem on this board is the groupthink that builds with momentum. If everyone posted, say, 20 posts about this process based on what was reported, what they knew about basketball, etc BUT they were unable to read other's posts until after they wrote theirs, I think you would come up with a substantially different take on this board. At the same time, it would be a lot more valuable in terms of insight. I am an optimist but am naturally skeptical. It's why people thought I was a troll when Hurley was hired. Because he the son of a Hall of Famer, people assumed he actually could coach in games. So, I questioned the offense and end game sets and other items. All of a sudden I am a troll. Similarly, with this search, I am skeptical of the process. I just want the powers that be to look at this as a 2018-2024 hire not a keep the class together hire. But if you read people's responses....it's because I hate Cox. Anyway...I bet I would enjoy a beer with 95% of the people on here. People just get a little weird at the intersection of anonymity and their favorite sports teams.
Stop puffing yourself up that it had something to do with your unique take on Xs and Os that ruffled feathers here...you only posted after a loss, disappeared for an entire year basically when we were winning games, and then surprisingly re-emerged when we struggled again. That is the only reason your motives are questioned, no matter what type of fan you are (cynic or optimist) that behavior is not normal and leaves you susceptible to criticism. In terms of your Xs and Os takes, fwiw, you were wrong on just about every one. So there's that.
Lol. No. The guy ran an inflexible offense and horrible end game sets six years ago and six weeks ago. The only difference was he added a lot of talent, which is the name of the game, anyhow. And probably why he will be pretty good at UConn. How many times did he beat the better team or even an equally talented team. And I know there was no way in the world we were beating the Dream Team, I mean six ACC loss Duke team, but that was as horrible a game plan as you will ever find against a zone. If you think he was a good basketball tactician after the last six years, you may want to reevaluate what your favorite sport is. If we are being honest, the biggest shots in the Oklahoma game came off really. pretty terrible action. It's just that EC hit some big time shots.
I can't understand why all of you can't understand what GBG is telling us: he's always right.
6 x
"Every season, college basketball has one or two teams that rise from dormancy to relevancy, squads that make long-awaited charges at the NCAA Tournament and become really fun storylines along the way."
Iggy1979 wrote:I can't understand why all of you can't understand what GBG is telling us: he's always right.
I believe I have only one opinion here that I would die on a hill for. That's that DH was a below average offensive basketball mind. Or, I should say, his ability to create and install an offense was below average. The guy would high ball screen a fire hydrant. Everything else, from me, is more about process. Outcomes take care of themselves. I am probably the only person here who will admit they don't have any clue about whether the next coach will be a success or not.
jcru wrote:GBG, someone the other day said I was you. I wanted you to know I considered that a compliment. You know your stuff and you carry yourself in a straightforward common sense way that reminds me of Rod.
Cheers
Ha! Thanks. Rod and I got into some dust ups but I would like to think he came around to the way I look at things. Not that he agreed with me but saw the prism through which I looked at things. I certainly came around on him. I like your takes on stuff like this because I think the biggest problem on this board is the groupthink that builds with momentum. If everyone posted, say, 20 posts about this process based on what was reported, what they knew about basketball, etc BUT they were unable to read other's posts until after they wrote theirs, I think you would come up with a substantially different take on this board. At the same time, it would be a lot more valuable in terms of insight. I am an optimist but am naturally skeptical. It's why people thought I was a troll when Hurley was hired. Because he the son of a Hall of Famer, people assumed he actually could coach in games. So, I questioned the offense and end game sets and other items. All of a sudden I am a troll. Similarly, with this search, I am skeptical of the process. I just want the powers that be to look at this as a 2018-2024 hire not a keep the class together hire. But if you read people's responses....it's because I hate Cox. Anyway...I bet I would enjoy a beer with 95% of the people on here. People just get a little weird at the intersection of anonymity and their favorite sports teams.
Most of basketball scoring is a guy dribbling and then going for a lay up or shot.
I think DH had some shortcomings but you cant fault him for EC dribbling for a minute and then launching a shot. That was EC's thing.
Encouraging stuff was that they did try to run stuff. And then they did go back to stuff that worked. Albeit I felt the stuff was always difficult.
Like EC fading behind a screen for a 30 foot 3 pointer from the right side of the court. LOL. That was like a go-to play to get an open shot from 29 feet. It worked. It didn't work. IDK if coaches should get credit or critics for stuff like that. Usually coaches aren't lauded for drawing up an open 30 footer for a back peddling 35% shooter.
We did have a good season. And a great run since 2014.
Gonebarongone wrote:
Ha! Thanks. Rod and I got into some dust ups but I would like to think he came around to the way I look at things. Not that he agreed with me but saw the prism through which I looked at things. I certainly came around on him. I like your takes on stuff like this because I think the biggest problem on this board is the groupthink that builds with momentum. If everyone posted, say, 20 posts about this process based on what was reported, what they knew about basketball, etc BUT they were unable to read other's posts until after they wrote theirs, I think you would come up with a substantially different take on this board. At the same time, it would be a lot more valuable in terms of insight. I am an optimist but am naturally skeptical. It's why people thought I was a troll when Hurley was hired. Because he the son of a Hall of Famer, people assumed he actually could coach in games. So, I questioned the offense and end game sets and other items. All of a sudden I am a troll. Similarly, with this search, I am skeptical of the process. I just want the powers that be to look at this as a 2018-2024 hire not a keep the class together hire. But if you read people's responses....it's because I hate Cox. Anyway...I bet I would enjoy a beer with 95% of the people on here. People just get a little weird at the intersection of anonymity and their favorite sports teams.
Stop puffing yourself up that it had something to do with your unique take on Xs and Os that ruffled feathers here...you only posted after a loss, disappeared for an entire year basically when we were winning games, and then surprisingly re-emerged when we struggled again. That is the only reason your motives are questioned, no matter what type of fan you are (cynic or optimist) that behavior is not normal and leaves you susceptible to criticism. In terms of your Xs and Os takes, fwiw, you were wrong on just about every one. So there's that.
Lol. No. The guy ran an inflexible offense and horrible end game sets six years ago and six weeks ago. The only difference was he added a lot of talent, which is the name of the game, anyhow. And probably why he will be pretty good at UConn. How many times did he beat the better team or even an equally talented team. And I know there was no way in the world we were beating the Dream Team, I mean six ACC loss Duke team, but that was as horrible a game plan as you will ever find against a zone. If you think he was a good basketball tactician after the last six years, you may want to reevaluate what your favorite sport is. If we are being honest, the biggest shots in the Oklahoma game came off really. pretty terrible action. It's just that EC hit some big time shots.
I will go out on a limb and agree with GBG. Hurley was a similar coach to Baron just with slightly better players. The difference between NIT and the NCAA. I also did not want to see him leave because he is young enough to grow as a coach and could have been very successful. Many on this board in January 2017 were talking about how the next coach would be the coach to bring us to where we wanted to go (sweet 16 and farther). The end to this season and the Duke game in particular left a sour taste in my mouth on Hurley, fielding multiple calls from people watching the team down the stretch wondering how we were able to win games with such an uninspired offense. Like Baron, a very good defensive coach, meh on offense.
I don't think you can fairly compare the recent URI teams with Baron's best.
Hurley is clearly better than Baron.
But the teams? idk if you can compare them fairly. The difference is Dan Hurley and all the things he put into the program in the end equaled much more success than Jim Baron even dreamed of. Jim Baron came up short and I think he dreamt of hosting NITs. He came up short with a lot of very talented guys. Individually down the line they compare very well against Hurley's best.
Gonebarongone wrote:
Ha! Thanks. Rod and I got into some dust ups but I would like to think he came around to the way I look at things. Not that he agreed with me but saw the prism through which I looked at things. I certainly came around on him. I like your takes on stuff like this because I think the biggest problem on this board is the groupthink that builds with momentum. If everyone posted, say, 20 posts about this process based on what was reported, what they knew about basketball, etc BUT they were unable to read other's posts until after they wrote theirs, I think you would come up with a substantially different take on this board. At the same time, it would be a lot more valuable in terms of insight. I am an optimist but am naturally skeptical. It's why people thought I was a troll when Hurley was hired. Because he the son of a Hall of Famer, people assumed he actually could coach in games. So, I questioned the offense and end game sets and other items. All of a sudden I am a troll. Similarly, with this search, I am skeptical of the process. I just want the powers that be to look at this as a 2018-2024 hire not a keep the class together hire. But if you read people's responses....it's because I hate Cox. Anyway...I bet I would enjoy a beer with 95% of the people on here. People just get a little weird at the intersection of anonymity and their favorite sports teams.
Stop puffing yourself up that it had something to do with your unique take on Xs and Os that ruffled feathers here...you only posted after a loss, disappeared for an entire year basically when we were winning games, and then surprisingly re-emerged when we struggled again. That is the only reason your motives are questioned, no matter what type of fan you are (cynic or optimist) that behavior is not normal and leaves you susceptible to criticism. In terms of your Xs and Os takes, fwiw, you were wrong on just about every one. So there's that.
Lol. No. The guy ran an inflexible offense and horrible end game sets six years ago and six weeks ago. The only difference was he added a lot of talent, which is the name of the game, anyhow. And probably why he will be pretty good at UConn. How many times did he beat the better team or even an equally talented team. And I know there was no way in the world we were beating the Dream Team, I mean six ACC loss Duke team, but that was as horrible a game plan as you will ever find against a zone. If you think he was a good basketball tactician after the last six years, you may want to reevaluate what your favorite sport is. If we are being honest, the biggest shots in the Oklahoma game came off really. pretty terrible action. It's just that EC hit some big time shots.
I'm sure I'll get lambasted for this, but I tend to agree with GBG here. In fact I mentioned in a separate post a few weeks ago that I never found Hurley to be a very good tactician, specifically on the offensive side of the ball. Just so predictable and unimaginative in most cases. Clearly the man can coach defense, but even his refusal to switch to a zone once in a while used to drive me crazy.
Now all of that being said, I wish he was still the head coach of our basketball team because I really thought he was building something special here. But I think we have a great opportunity to hire a new coach who might possess a lot of Dan's positive traits while also providing better results from an x's and o's standpoint. That's my hope at least.
Seawrightspostgame wrote:I don't think you can fairly compare the recent URI teams with Baron's best.
Hurley is clearly better than Baron.
But the teams? idk if you can compare them fairly. The difference is Dan Hurley and all the things he put into the program in the end equaled much more success than Jim Baron even dreamed of. Jim Baron came up short and I think he dreamt of hosting NITs. He came up short with a lot of very talented guys. Individually down the line they compare very well against Hurley's best.
I always felt that Baron was incredibly conventional, with all the pluses and minuses that entailed. For the first few years, his teams gave really good effort, and they won games they probably shouldn't have. However, he had troubles adapting his lineup and strategies when things weren't working. The thing that always drove me insane was the token starting of a stiff center that couldn't play that much. Whereas this year, Hurley would just roll with four guards / wings because they were the best players.
bigappleram wrote:
Stop puffing yourself up that it had something to do with your unique take on Xs and Os that ruffled feathers here...you only posted after a loss, disappeared for an entire year basically when we were winning games, and then surprisingly re-emerged when we struggled again. That is the only reason your motives are questioned, no matter what type of fan you are (cynic or optimist) that behavior is not normal and leaves you susceptible to criticism. In terms of your Xs and Os takes, fwiw, you were wrong on just about every one. So there's that.
Lol. No. The guy ran an inflexible offense and horrible end game sets six years ago and six weeks ago. The only difference was he added a lot of talent, which is the name of the game, anyhow. And probably why he will be pretty good at UConn. How many times did he beat the better team or even an equally talented team. And I know there was no way in the world we were beating the Dream Team, I mean six ACC loss Duke team, but that was as horrible a game plan as you will ever find against a zone. If you think he was a good basketball tactician after the last six years, you may want to reevaluate what your favorite sport is. If we are being honest, the biggest shots in the Oklahoma game came off really. pretty terrible action. It's just that EC hit some big time shots.
I'm sure I'll get lambasted for this, but I tend to agree with GBG here. In fact I mentioned in a separate post a few weeks ago that I never found Hurley to be a very good tactician, specifically on the offensive side of the ball. Just so predictable and unimaginative in most cases. Clearly the man can coach defense, but even his refusal to switch to a zone once in a while used to drive me crazy.
Now all of that being said, I wish he was still the head coach of our basketball team because I really thought he was building something special here. But I think we have a great opportunity to hire a new coach who might possess a lot of Dan's positive traits while also providing better results from an x's and o's standpoint. That's my hope at least.
I'd agree with Hurley wasn't a master Xs and Os guy. But I think he improved in his time here, and at a certain point, you have to focus on the positives of a coach - or a player, for that matter - instead of dwelling on the negatives. You can't be in a position to lose games because of bad strategy if you aren't recruiting well, if you're not motivating guys well in practice, if you're dealing with lots of transfers year after year, etc. If his in-game strategy was around a C+ / B-, I think the other aspects of his tenure were in the A-range.
Gonebarongone wrote:
Lol. No. The guy ran an inflexible offense and horrible end game sets six years ago and six weeks ago. The only difference was he added a lot of talent, which is the name of the game, anyhow. And probably why he will be pretty good at UConn. How many times did he beat the better team or even an equally talented team. And I know there was no way in the world we were beating the Dream Team, I mean six ACC loss Duke team, but that was as horrible a game plan as you will ever find against a zone. If you think he was a good basketball tactician after the last six years, you may want to reevaluate what your favorite sport is. If we are being honest, the biggest shots in the Oklahoma game came off really. pretty terrible action. It's just that EC hit some big time shots.
I'm sure I'll get lambasted for this, but I tend to agree with GBG here. In fact I mentioned in a separate post a few weeks ago that I never found Hurley to be a very good tactician, specifically on the offensive side of the ball. Just so predictable and unimaginative in most cases. Clearly the man can coach defense, but even his refusal to switch to a zone once in a while used to drive me crazy.
Now all of that being said, I wish he was still the head coach of our basketball team because I really thought he was building something special here. But I think we have a great opportunity to hire a new coach who might possess a lot of Dan's positive traits while also providing better results from an x's and o's standpoint. That's my hope at least.
I'd agree with Hurley wasn't a master Xs and Os guy. But I think he improved in his time here, and at a certain point, you have to focus on the positives of a coach - or a player, for that matter - instead of dwelling on the negatives. You can't be in a position to lose games because of bad strategy if you aren't recruiting well, if you're not motivating guys well in practice, if you're dealing with lots of transfers year after year, etc. If his in-game strategy was around a C+ / B-, I think the other aspects of his tenure were in the A-range.
Trying to not be a total honk here, but I do wonder if Cox joining the staff had any impact on Hurley's improvement as a tactician. Of course improving players with more experience in the system helps, too, but I do think the team was better in terms of creating good shots within the structure of what Hurley obviously wanted to do in the later years that he was here. If you look at the guys who came and went from the staff during Dan's time here, Bobby, Preston, Luke and ARD all were hired away either for a promotion or a higher paying assistants job, so obviously those guys weren't bad. But none of them had the service time on college benches that Cox had, and it is hard to argue there wasn't marked improvement after he arrived.
2 x
"If you build it, they will come." --Us, circa 2011
bigappleram wrote:
Stop puffing yourself up that it had something to do with your unique take on Xs and Os that ruffled feathers here...you only posted after a loss, disappeared for an entire year basically when we were winning games, and then surprisingly re-emerged when we struggled again. That is the only reason your motives are questioned, no matter what type of fan you are (cynic or optimist) that behavior is not normal and leaves you susceptible to criticism. In terms of your Xs and Os takes, fwiw, you were wrong on just about every one. So there's that.
Lol. No. The guy ran an inflexible offense and horrible end game sets six years ago and six weeks ago. The only difference was he added a lot of talent, which is the name of the game, anyhow. And probably why he will be pretty good at UConn. How many times did he beat the better team or even an equally talented team. And I know there was no way in the world we were beating the Dream Team, I mean six ACC loss Duke team, but that was as horrible a game plan as you will ever find against a zone. If you think he was a good basketball tactician after the last six years, you may want to reevaluate what your favorite sport is. If we are being honest, the biggest shots in the Oklahoma game came off really. pretty terrible action. It's just that EC hit some big time shots.
I'm sure I'll get lambasted for this, but I tend to agree with GBG here. In fact I mentioned in a separate post a few weeks ago that I never found Hurley to be a very good tactician, specifically on the offensive side of the ball. Just so predictable and unimaginative in most cases. Clearly the man can coach defense, but even his refusal to switch to a zone once in a while used to drive me crazy.
Now all of that being said, I wish he was still the head coach of our basketball team because I really thought he was building something special here. But I think we have a great opportunity to hire a new coach who might possess a lot of Dan's positive traits while also providing better results from an x's and o's standpoint. That's my hope at least.
I agree with the critiques of Hurley's coaching. Nobody saying he's a bad coach. Unimaginative and stagnant on offense. Offensive execution out of timeouts was generally poor. He was a good recruiter, OK in-game coach, got maximum effort, and most importantly brought a great culture, togetherness, and work ethic to the program and players.
Bottom line for any coach...is the program better or worse than when he arrived? I am thankful for Hurley's contributions as the program is in a far better place. I wish him nothing but the best and turn the page to the next chapter in URI basketball...
