KeaneyBlue - The URI Basketball Forum

And your finalist are......... The below list of coaches will interview tomoorw in Boston, we should have an answer by Thursday.

1. David Cox
2. John Becker
3. Joe Dooley
4.Micah Shrewsberry

What are your thoughts ?

Wake me up when it's over?

Rhodymadness401 wrote:And your finalist are......... The below list of coaches will interview tomoorw in Boston, we should have an answer by Thursday.

1. David Cox
2. John Becker
3. Joe Dooley
4.Micah Shrewsberry

What are your thoughts ?

And this is why whoever was waiting at Green should be at Logan...

I'm so over this. Avoiding the board until Wednesday when we finally announce Coach Cox.

David Cox and let’s move forward.

I rather Delroy than all of these guys.

Except Cox. He's good.

If Cox had the job, his recruits would know.

If Cox had the job, those tweets today wouldn't have been necessary. I'm sure they were trying to avoid doing that altogether.

Someone must be making a late push, is my guess.

Billyboy78 wrote:If Cox had the job, his recruits would know.

I'm either "not so sure about that", or, maybe they "do" know, and they're just messing with everyone...because they know they can now...

Hopefully, if Cox is named, and Thorr gets asked "how much of a factor was roster/recruit retention?", he just says, "There were a lot of factors that went into it, and I don't want to get into any specifics", and it ends there. Whether he says it was a huge factor, or no factor...there's no real upside to either...

That sounds pretty sage, actually. Good call

I will have a fit if David Cox doesn't get the job

Recruits don't know because a decision hasn't been made. Their tweets were a show of support.

Micah Who-berry?

Rhode_Island_Red wrote:Micah Who-berry?

assistant coach of the Celtics.

DC_Rams wrote:

Rhode_Island_Red wrote:Micah Who-berry?

assistant coach of the Celtics.

Was also a finalist for the UMass job LY.

To me Cox is the clear best of this bunch. There is no one on this list that is head and shoulders above Cox.

RF1 wrote:

DC_Rams wrote:

Rhode_Island_Red wrote:Micah Who-berry?

assistant coach of the Celtics.

Was also a finalist for the UMass job LY.

Right, but couldn't have been better than their third choice based on how things worked out. My main concerns would be that he's never recruited this area and that he will start with potentially a worse roster than Hurley inherited.

The last time URI chose someone UMass interviewed we ended up with Jim Baron.

Do any of these candidates have any impact 5th year transfers in their back pocket.
Any chance little Rickey shows up to the day interview process invited or not.

GO RHODY!

......if not Cox, I will go to the new coach intro presser with less enthusiasm.......but will get behind door 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, or whatever......Go Rhody......

Rhodymadness401 wrote:And your finalist are......... The below list of coaches will interview tomoorw in Boston, we should have an answer by Thursday.

1. David Cox
2. John Becker
3. Joe Dooley
4.Micah Shrewsberry

What are your thoughts ?

This contradicts the report that David Cox had his final interview today.

Rhodymadness401 wrote:And your finalist are......... The below list of coaches will interview tomoorw in Boston, we should have an answer by Thursday.

1. David Cox
2. John Becker
3. Joe Dooley
4.Micah Shrewsberry

What are your thoughts ?

madness: glad to have you back. Hadn't heard from you since Ty's little problem

Is the Micah Srewsbury good info I have been told a different name

Kingston wrote:Is the Micah Srewsbury good info I have been told a different name

Share

Iggy1979 wrote:

Kingston wrote:Is the Micah Srewsbury good info I have been told a different name

Share

Larrañaga?

steviep123 wrote:To me Cox is the clear best of this bunch. There is no one on this list that is head and shoulders above Cox.

Put Dooley's resume next to Cox and tell me why you feel that way.

Dooley has more experience. Is it better?

Yeah he was a great recruiter at Kansas. So what, look what they can offer.

As a HC, no great shakes imo.

rambone 78 wrote:Dooley has more experience. Is it better?

Yeah he was a great recruiter at Kansas. So what, look what they can offer.

As a HC, no great shakes imo.

.500 in a conference at a graveyard basketball school at ECU. And took what Enfield built and has been great for four years. You know, just sort of what we want the next guy to do. Yeah, let's also downplay ten years of recruiting at the highest levels. Its not necessarily the results because KU can offer a ton. It's ten years of getting into the highest level of recruiting...the AAU scene, the coaches, the high schools. You can't look at Dooley and Cox and think Cox is in the same stratosphere, resume wise.

Gonebarongone wrote:

rambone 78 wrote:Dooley has more experience. Is it better?

Yeah he was a great recruiter at Kansas. So what, look what they can offer.

As a HC, no great shakes imo.

.500 in a conference at a graveyard basketball school at ECU. And took what Enfield built and has been great for four years. You know, just sort of what we want the next guy to do. Yeah, let's also downplay ten years of recruiting at the highest levels. Its not necessarily the results because KU can offer a ton. It's ten years of getting into the highest level of recruiting...the AAU scene, the coaches, the high schools. You can't look at Dooley and Cox and think Cox is in the same stratosphere, resume wise.

The only concern would be could Dooley recruit the area, URI prospects usually come from the New England, NY/NJ, DMV area, can any of the canidates recruit that area as well as Cox ? if so then they would be a great candidate.

Gonebarongone wrote:

rambone 78 wrote:Dooley has more experience. Is it better?

Yeah he was a great recruiter at Kansas. So what, look what they can offer.

As a HC, no great shakes imo.

.500 in a conference at a graveyard basketball school at ECU. And took what Enfield built and has been great for four years. You know, just sort of what we want the next guy to do. Yeah, let's also downplay ten years of recruiting at the highest levels. Its not necessarily the results because KU can offer a ton. It's ten years of getting into the highest level of recruiting...the AAU scene, the coaches, the high schools. You can't look at Dooley and Cox and think Cox is in the same stratosphere, resume wise.

I look at Dooley and see adequate. I look at Cox and see the potential to be much better than that. Granted, he could not even be adequate. It doesn't seem like that is the case based on everything I know about the guy, but you never know how someone will respond when they get their shot. But I know how Dooley has responded, which is "eh, not terrible." I want better than that. I'll take the lower floor for the higher ceiling. And I know that you don't want to hear it, but the fact that Cox could takeover and not have the program take two steps back is a part of it for me. Even if you honestly felt that Dooley would be better in year 5 or year 6, I think the program would suffer real long term damage by going 6-24 next year because they only have 6 scholarship players and only 3 of those are A10 caliber. Bye bye all momentum in terms of ticket revenue, TV exposure, donations, etc. Bye bye practice facility and charter flights. Maybe 5 years from now you can get back to the point you're at now. Maybe. That is a disaster.

TruePoint wrote:

Gonebarongone wrote:

rambone 78 wrote:Dooley has more experience. Is it better?

Yeah he was a great recruiter at Kansas. So what, look what they can offer.

As a HC, no great shakes imo.

.500 in a conference at a graveyard basketball school at ECU. And took what Enfield built and has been great for four years. You know, just sort of what we want the next guy to do. Yeah, let's also downplay ten years of recruiting at the highest levels. Its not necessarily the results because KU can offer a ton. It's ten years of getting into the highest level of recruiting...the AAU scene, the coaches, the high schools. You can't look at Dooley and Cox and think Cox is in the same stratosphere, resume wise.

I look at Dooley and see adequate. I look at Cox and see the potential to be much better than that. Granted, he could not even be adequate. It doesn't seem like that is the case based on everything I know about the guy, but you never know how someone will respond when they get their shot. But I know how Dooley has responded, which is "eh, not terrible." I want better than that. I'll take the lower floor for the higher ceiling. And I know that you don't want to hear it, but the fact that Cox could takeover and not have the program take two steps back is a part of it for me. Even if you honestly felt that Dooley would be better in year 5 or year 6, I think the program would suffer real long term damage by going 6-24 next year because they only have 6 scholarship players and only 3 of those are A10 caliber. Bye bye all momentum in terms of ticket revenue, TV exposure, donations, etc. Bye bye practice facility and charter flights. Maybe 5 years from now you can get back to the point you're at now. Maybe. That is a disaster.

I wonder why people say something like this. His conference record his five years at FGCU is 14-4, 11-3,8-6, 12-2, 12-2. He took the momentum, kept it, and then took a full cycle of his own recruits and did the same thing. Your opinion of what he could do is not rooted in anything. Would you be happy with 14-4 in the A10 next year? If you are in the bag for Cox and are 100% sure he is the right guy, that's fine. You might even be proven right. Just know that your take on Dooley makes no sense.

Winning at that level (a conference where the winner is a 15 or 16 seed) does not automatically translate to better conferences. Do you think Pitt would have taken 14 conference wins next year? I guess not, or they obviously would have called Joe Dooley....

Dooley has been the HC at FGC for 5 years. They have made the Tournament twice and lost in the first round both times. This year they lost in the first round of the NIT. They play in the Atlantic Sun Conference. Without looking it up, name another team in the A Sun.

Gonebarongone wrote:

TruePoint wrote:

Gonebarongone wrote: .500 in a conference at a graveyard basketball school at ECU. And took what Enfield built and has been great for four years. You know, just sort of what we want the next guy to do. Yeah, let's also downplay ten years of recruiting at the highest levels. Its not necessarily the results because KU can offer a ton. It's ten years of getting into the highest level of recruiting...the AAU scene, the coaches, the high schools. You can't look at Dooley and Cox and think Cox is in the same stratosphere, resume wise.

I look at Dooley and see adequate. I look at Cox and see the potential to be much better than that. Granted, he could not even be adequate. It doesn't seem like that is the case based on everything I know about the guy, but you never know how someone will respond when they get their shot. But I know how Dooley has responded, which is "eh, not terrible." I want better than that. I'll take the lower floor for the higher ceiling. And I know that you don't want to hear it, but the fact that Cox could takeover and not have the program take two steps back is a part of it for me. Even if you honestly felt that Dooley would be better in year 5 or year 6, I think the program would suffer real long term damage by going 6-24 next year because they only have 6 scholarship players and only 3 of those are A10 caliber. Bye bye all momentum in terms of ticket revenue, TV exposure, donations, etc. Bye bye practice facility and charter flights. Maybe 5 years from now you can get back to the point you're at now. Maybe. That is a disaster.

I wonder why people say something like this. His conference record his five years at FGCU is 14-4, 11-3,8-6, 12-2, 12-2. He took the momentum, kept it, and then took a full cycle of his own recruits and did the same thing. Your opinion of what he could do is not rooted in anything. Would you be happy with 14-4 in the A10 next year? If you are in the bag for Cox and are 100% sure he is the right guy, that's fine. You might even be proven right. Just know that your take on Dooley makes no sense.

Just want to point out that it's refreshing to read a well thought out and intelligent discussion as opposed to some of the other stuff going on on this forum. Carry on

TruePoint wrote:Winning at that level (a conference where the winner is a 15 or 16 seed) does not automatically translate to better conferences. Do you think Pitt would have taken 14 conference wins next year? I guess not, or they obviously would have called Joe Dooley....

Well, this isn't a rebuild, for one. Enfield and Hurley at FGCU and URI are fair comps and we are talking about the next guy will do with momentum. Also, Pitt isn't hiring Cox, either. I would take Capel over Dooley if that's what we were talking about. But, it's not. Like I said, if Cox is your guy, that is fine. Just don't tell me you are giving Dooley a fair shake. The resumes are not close.

Hiring Dooley is not "aiming for the stars with this hire"....lol.......you old timers will remember that quote.....

That was AD Ron Petro after they fired JD......and we ended up with Jim Baron.

TruePoint wrote:Winning at that level (a conference where the winner is a 15 or 16 seed) does not automatically translate to better conferences. Do you think Pitt would have taken 14 conference wins next year? I guess not, or they obviously would have called Joe Dooley....

Hurley came from the NEC which is probably worse than the A Sun...

Gonebarongone wrote:

TruePoint wrote:Winning at that level (a conference where the winner is a 15 or 16 seed) does not automatically translate to better conferences. Do you think Pitt would have taken 14 conference wins next year? I guess not, or they obviously would have called Joe Dooley....

Well, this isn't a rebuild, for one. Enfield and Hurley at FGCU and URI are fair comps and we are talking about the next guy will do with momentum. Also, Pitt isn't hiring Cox, either. I would take Capel over Dooley if that's what we were talking about. But, it's not. Like I said, if Cox is your guy, that is fine. Just don't tell me you are giving Dooley a fair shake. The resumes are not close.

Again, I know you don't want to hear it, but the program continuity matters here. I agree with the idea that you don't hire a coach just to try to save one player, but you have to be able to take each situation independently. There's a difference between a qualified coach and a buffoon who's only a candidate because of the players. Cox is a legit candidate, not a buffoon.

Here, the difference in outcomes is so dramatic if you keep the roster/recruiting class intact or not, and this program really is resting atop a fulcrum right now. There is a chance to build on what started under Hurley and give the program its longest sustained period of success in its history. That has to factor into your thinking on this, even if you truly believe based on their resumes that's Dooley would do better if they both started from scratch. That isn't the reality of the situation here.

And on the point about the resume - every time an assistant gets a job, there was somebody out there with more head coaching experience. That is way too simplified of a way to look at it. Many programs - and especially programs situated similarly to URI - have built their programs promoting qualified assistants to the head job. Does Joe Dooley not have a better resume than Travis Steele?

Section104 wrote:

Iggy1979 wrote:

Kingston wrote:Is the Micah Srewsbury good info I have been told a different name

Share

Larrañaga?

Much stronger candidate in my mind - less college experience than Micah though

I would like to throw this out for all those that are so locked in with Cox being the clear cut best choice. If Dan had stayed, would Cox be a hot commodity out there right now. I don't believe so. Look no further than Tom Moore. He leaves UCONN to become head coach at Quinnipiac. He has far and away best facilities in the MAAC Conference and he couldn't get it done. I know this won't change the minds of many, but if he isn't selected, it won't be the end of the world.

Better be Cox or we will be left with nothing all the recruits gone and probably Fatts JD and Cyril too ??

Cameron_Dollar wrote:I would like to throw this out for all those that are so locked in with Cox being the clear cut best choice. If Dan had stayed, would Cox be a hot commodity out there right now. I don't believe so. Look no further than Tom Moore. He leaves UCONN to become head coach at Quinnipiac. He has far and away best facilities in the MAAC Conference and he couldn't get it done. I know this won't change the minds of many, but if he isn't selected, it won't be the end of the world.

I frankly think he would have, as much of a "hot commodity" a non-P5 assistant can be. I forget whose list, Andy Katz or maybe a different writer, who ranked Cox either in the top 10 or 20 of assistants in the country. Maybe a good portion is the "visible" aspect of recruiting and the game coaching part is still a bit unknown. By nature, most programs promote assistants from within and don't seek out assistants from other programs, so it's not like Cox would be hired by Louisville. As the same time, I could see schools like La Salle kicking the tires if there was an extension announced for Dan. I also think if Dan changed his mind and stayed this time, the administration would immediately bump up David's salary substantially and increased the buyout in preparation for the "next" school to court Dan.

Cameron_Dollar wrote:I would like to throw this out for all those that are so locked in with Cox being the clear cut best choice. If Dan had stayed, would Cox be a hot commodity out there right now. I don't believe so. Look no further than Tom Moore. He leaves UCONN to become head coach at Quinnipiac. He has far and away best facilities in the MAAC Conference and he couldn't get it done. I know this won't change the minds of many, but if he isn't selected, it won't be the end of the world.

Moore coached for 10 years at Quinnipiac, won the conference and was named coach of the year. Hard to say he couldn't get it done.

As I addressed earlier, Cox has had his "tires kicked" before on other jobs. This is why Thorr (and Dan) pushed for him to get a buyout if he wasn't named the next coach. It helped keep a hot assistant on URI's sideline.

What people need to remember is that when Hurley talked about the program and its future success, he was talking about everyone from the top down... video guy, bench manager, etc... the line of assistant coaches is a strong part of that programs success. Thorr must use this as a learning opportunity from Hurley, he must take a leap of faith and build on Dan’s concept, (ie Xavier)

Dre3000 wrote:

Cameron_Dollar wrote:I would like to throw this out for all those that are so locked in with Cox being the clear cut best choice. If Dan had stayed, would Cox be a hot commodity out there right now. I don't believe so. Look no further than Tom Moore. He leaves UCONN to become head coach at Quinnipiac. He has far and away best facilities in the MAAC Conference and he couldn't get it done. I know this won't change the minds of many, but if he isn't selected, it won't be the end of the world.

Moore coached for 10 years at Quinnipiac, won the conference and was named coach off the year. Hard to say he couldn't get it done.

As I addressed earlier, Cox has had his "tires kicked" before on other jobs. This is why Thorr (and Dan) pushed for him to get a buyout if he wasn't named the next coach. It helped keep a hot assistant on URI's sideline.

DRE, right on.

Section104 wrote:

Iggy1979 wrote:

Kingston wrote:Is the Micah Srewsbury good info I have been told a different name

Share

Larrañaga?

Jay L would be the man.

I love Coach L(father). I think that is one of the biggest holes in the whole FBI thing. Jim L was basically like what the hell are you talking about!?>

As it turned out, Dan was the master of leverage using Pitt to gain a better contract from UCONN. If Cox had even a sniff of another offer, I assure you we would be hearing about it from "unnamed" sources. That is the job of a good agent. I will say this until I go to my grave. There are two rules that must always be adhered to in college basketball.
1. Always foul with under 5 seconds when you have a three point lead and your opponent has the ball.
2. Never hire or fire a coach based on an incoming recruiting class.

Seawrightspostgame wrote:

Section104 wrote:

Iggy1979 wrote: Share

Larrañaga?

Jay L would be the man.

I love Coach L(father). I think that is one of the biggest holes in the whole FBI thing. Jim L was basically like what the hell are you talking about!?>

Father is a Pee-C guy. Nuf ced.

Was told it was originally Ashley Howard was the forth guy to be interviewed. He has dropped our and is in line for the Lasalle job. the list of 4 is correct. Can't see how we don't name Cox. Maybe we should be debating who he hires as an assistant instead.
On an other note don't we have a stipulation of no NCAA violations. rules out both Larranga"s father is cheating at miami. And the son does not blink. ever. Has to be a violation everything else is

Dooley looks like he will be hired at ECU.....waiting on us I guess.