Head coach speculation for 2022-23

[steveystuds06]

Bashir Mason. I feel like we have a good track record with Wagner head coaches.

Yup I like him a lot

[Big Rhody Guy]

Been spending A LOT of time thinking about this. Here are some names that look like they could be in the mix for a high level mid major head coaching gig. I think they're all pretty realistic, none are perfect obviously but I think we're a long way away from deserving a perfect candidate.
Jared Grasso-Bryant Head Coach
John Becker-Vermont Head Coach
Bashir Mason- Wagner Head Coach
Matt Langel- Colgate Head Coach
Kimani Young- UCONN Associate Head Coach
Jamal Brunt-VCU Associate Head Coach
Kyle Neptune- Fordham Head Coach
Bobby Hurley- ASU Head Coach
My choice is Becker, should have taken him 4 years ago even if it meant Fatts, Jeff and Cyril left.

[Rhody Sody]

Been spending A LOT of time thinking about this. Here are some names that look like they could be in the mix for a high level mid major head coaching gig. I think they're all pretty realistic, none are perfect obviously but I think we're a long way away from deserving a perfect candidate.
Jared Grasso-Bryant Head Coach
John Becker-Vermont Head Coach
Bashir Mason- Wagner Head Coach
Matt Langel- Colgate Head Coach
Kimani Young- UCONN Associate Head Coach
Jamal Brunt-VCU Associate Head Coach
Kyle Neptune- Fordham Head Coach
Bobby Hurley- ASU Head Coach
My choice is Becker, should have taken him 4 years ago even if it meant Fatts, Jeff and Cyril left.

Same here, going with Becker

[RF1]

Becker was actually probably more attractive four years ago. The culture and perspective of his program took a bit hit with the 2019 gang rape (UVM swimmer) allegations against several of his players and the school's mishandling of the situation. His teams have continued to win and will be favored to win their league tourney and make the NCAA this season. Becker had his team make the NCAA three times in his previous ten years in Burlington. His only NCAA win was however in the play in round versus Lamar back in 2012, his first season as head coach. His stock would however rise considerably if he were to make the tournament and get a win this season.

[Rhody74]

Can Becker recruit in the A10? That’s my question.

[bigappleram]

Agreed? My biggest concern would be recruiting.

It’s quite clear what is needed in that regard - get fringe P5, BE and AAC recruits to pick Rhody. Have to recruit above the level to win consistently. See Dayton, VCU and to an extent SLU. Predominantly 3 stars, occasional 4 stars and once in a while a diamond in the rough. Work the portal.

[rjv]

I believe Kimani would be a great choice if he was willing to come to URI. He maybe on many teams radar. If he did come to URI and turn things around he would be gone in 3 to 4 years. Jamal Blunt would also be a great pick. He was in the A10 with Richmond left for Miami and came back to A10 with VCU.

[bigappleram]

Compare either of those assistants to what we have on our staff. Yet another really bad mark on Cox’s report card. We may have the least experienced/competent staffs in the conference. He picked every one of them. And don’t talk about $$$ bc Dan played with the same budget and had staffs head and shoulders better.

[Jersey77]

If indeed the position does open up, it will all depend on how much they are willing to spend on a HC and staff.

This will be a massive rebuilding task and it will probably be a while before we are relevant again.

[rjv]

Great point!!! Great Great Point!!!!!

[RF1]

I think URI would be better served going the experienced head coach route, especially with program currently in a down cycle. My earlier post in this thread about the last ten coaches at URI bears this out. All of the five hired experienced head coaches ultimately had some level of success at URI. Only one (Skinner) of the five assistant coaches had any real success. This despite the fact the assistant coaches generally were hired while the program was on an upward trajectory and the head coaches were mostly hired (except for Harrick) on a downward trend.

[Billyboy78]

If indeed the position does open up, it will all depend on how much they are willing to spend on a HC and staff.

This will be a massive rebuilding task and it will probably be a while before we are relevant again.

It's either that or be an 11th-14th place team every year with Cox.

[ace]

Compare either of those assistants to what we have on our staff. Yet another really bad mark on Cox’s report card. We may have the least experienced/competent staffs in the conference. He picked every one of them. And don’t talk about $$$ bc Dan played with the same budget and had staffs head and shoulders better.

Not a great look when Mason at Wagner has arguably put together a better overall staff.


* this is not an endorsement of hiring Bashir if the position opens up, just an observation

[ace]

If indeed the position does open up, it will all depend on how much they are willing to spend on a HC and staff.

This will be a massive rebuilding task and it will probably be a while before we are relevant again.

I don’t necessarily agree with that last point, unless we have different definitions of a massive rebuild and a while. In 14-15, the team was 13-5 in conference, only had a single holdover player (TJ), and was interesting and competitive. Plus, rhe program stuff is better now, and the transfer rules are different.

[Big Rhody Guy]

I believe Kimani would be a great choice if he was willing to come to URI. He maybe on many teams radar. If he did come to URI and turn things around he would be gone in 3 to 4 years. Jamal Blunt would also be a great pick. He was in the A10 with Richmond left for Miami and came back to A10 with VCU.

I would be ecstatic with Kimani. Neptune just left Nova for Fordham so I think the big east assistant coach to A-10 program is a realistic jump. He has not been connected to a job like Maryland (to my knowledge) at this point either.

[Blue Man]

There are 2 types of coaches here, obviously there are also significantly less likely options vs what we'll realistically (and un-excitedly) wind up with:

The pipe dream/wish it would happen/won't happen/should happen if we actually cared about basketball/but can't happen because we don't types:

Archie Miller/Chris Mack/Bobby Hurley - turns this program around in 2 years, with transfer rules being what they are. Names/splash from the hire gives us access to OOC games/tournaments we wouldn't get into until we're good again. Their names alone will recruit the kind of talent that can win in the A-10 by itself. Probably gives a shot in the arm to ticket sales and gives an immediate buzz back to Kingston.

Would also demand everything around the basketball program be invested in at a higher level. Probably would stick around longer than you'd think just because if they came here in the first place, it would mean we actually decided to invest in basketball.

The less excited/more realistic/"right" decision/safe/experienced/what we've always done types:

Everyone else - turns URI around (IF we guess right) in 4-6 years. May stay, might bounce once URI sniffs the tournament and they proved that the could win at a place that a lot of coaches don't.

Less exciting because it means we still don't want to invest at a high level. We're just going to go bargain basement hunting to get the "next" up and comer, pay the bare minimum, pay their staff the bare minimum, maybe build a practice facility under them, and repeat this cycle of kind of being good then sucking until we all grow old and die.

Yippee.

[ace]

Things can always change, but Kimani is very happy where he is right now.

[Bos8]

I believe Kimani would be a great choice if he was willing to come to URI. He maybe on many teams radar. If he did come to URI and turn things around he would be gone in 3 to 4 years. Jamal Blunt would also be a great pick. He was in the A10 with Richmond left for Miami and came back to A10 with VCU.

I would be ecstatic with Kimani. Neptune just left Nova for Fordham so I think the big east assistant coach to A-10 program is a realistic jump. He has not been connected to a job like Maryland (to my knowledge) at this point either.

Is there a Maryland connection? I thought Kimani was a New York guy? Are you thinking of Kim English, the new head coach at GMU? He is originally from Baltimore...

[section(105)]

………the assistant route does not do much for me…….not at this time……..not now

[Billyboy78]

There are 2 types of coaches here, obviously there are also significantly less likely options vs what we'll realistically (and un-excitedly) wind up with:

The pipe dream/wish it would happen/won't happen/should happen if we actually cared about basketball/but can't happen because we don't types:

Archie Miller/Chris Mack/Bobby Hurley - turns this program around in 2 years, with transfer rules being what they are. Names/splash from the hire gives us access to OOC games/tournaments we wouldn't get into until we're good again. Their names alone will recruit the kind of talent that can win in the A-10 by itself. Probably gives a shot in the arm to ticket sales and gives an immediate buzz back to Kingston.

Would also demand everything around the basketball program be invested in at a higher level. Probably would stick around longer than you'd think just because if they came here in the first place, it would mean we actually decided to invest in basketball.

The less excited/more realistic/"right" decision/safe/experienced/what we've always done types:

Everyone else - turns URI around (IF we guess right) in 4-6 years. May stay, might bounce once URI sniffs the tournament and they proved that the could win at a place that a lot of coaches don't.

Less exciting because it means we still don't want to invest at a high level. We're just going to go bargain basement hunting to get the "next" up and comer, pay the bare minimum, pay their staff the bare minimum, maybe build a practice facility under them, and repeat this cycle of kind of being good then sucking until we all grow old and die.

Yippee.

Welcome to my life.

[Bos8]

There are 2 types of coaches here, obviously there are also significantly less likely options vs what we'll realistically (and un-excitedly) wind up with:

The pipe dream/wish it would happen/won't happen/should happen if we actually cared about basketball/but can't happen because we don't types:

Archie Miller/Chris Mack/Bobby Hurley - turns this program around in 2 years, with transfer rules being what they are. Names/splash from the hire gives us access to OOC games/tournaments we wouldn't get into until we're good again. Their names alone will recruit the kind of talent that can win in the A-10 by itself. Probably gives a shot in the arm to ticket sales and gives an immediate buzz back to Kingston.

Would also demand everything around the basketball program be invested in at a higher level. Probably would stick around longer than you'd think just because if they came here in the first place, it would mean we actually decided to invest in basketball.

The less excited/more realistic/"right" decision/safe/experienced/what we've always done types:

Everyone else - turns URI around (IF we guess right) in 4-6 years. May stay, might bounce once URI sniffs the tournament and they proved that the could win at a place that a lot of coaches don't.

Less exciting because it means we still don't want to invest at a high level. We're just going to go bargain basement hunting to get the "next" up and comer, pay the bare minimum, pay their staff the bare minimum, maybe build a practice facility under them, and repeat this cycle of kind of being good then sucking until we all grow old and die.

Yippee.

Which category would you put Hurley in? Obviously hindsight is 20/20 but I thought Hurley was a slam dunk hire. I don't know if a slam dunk hire currently exists at this point, at least from the realistic names I have seen thrown out.

[Big Rhody Guy]

I believe Kimani would be a great choice if he was willing to come to URI. He maybe on many teams radar. If he did come to URI and turn things around he would be gone in 3 to 4 years. Jamal Blunt would also be a great pick. He was in the A10 with Richmond left for Miami and came back to A10 with VCU.

I would be ecstatic with Kimani. Neptune just left Nova for Fordham so I think the big east assistant coach to A-10 program is a realistic jump. He has not been connected to a job like Maryland (to my knowledge) at this point either.

Is there a Maryland connection? I thought Kimani was a New York guy? Are you thinking of Kim English, the new head coach at GMU? He is originally from Baltimore...

No I was just trying to say he has not yet been connected with jobs that have a bigger profile than us. Convincing myself it's realistic more than anything else.

[Blue Man]

There are 2 types of coaches here, obviously there are also significantly less likely options vs what we'll realistically (and un-excitedly) wind up with:

The pipe dream/wish it would happen/won't happen/should happen if we actually cared about basketball/but can't happen because we don't types:

Archie Miller/Chris Mack/Bobby Hurley - turns this program around in 2 years, with transfer rules being what they are. Names/splash from the hire gives us access to OOC games/tournaments we wouldn't get into until we're good again. Their names alone will recruit the kind of talent that can win in the A-10 by itself. Probably gives a shot in the arm to ticket sales and gives an immediate buzz back to Kingston.

Would also demand everything around the basketball program be invested in at a higher level. Probably would stick around longer than you'd think just because if they came here in the first place, it would mean we actually decided to invest in basketball.

The less excited/more realistic/"right" decision/safe/experienced/what we've always done types:

Everyone else - turns URI around (IF we guess right) in 4-6 years. May stay, might bounce once URI sniffs the tournament and they proved that the could win at a place that a lot of coaches don't.

Less exciting because it means we still don't want to invest at a high level. We're just going to go bargain basement hunting to get the "next" up and comer, pay the bare minimum, pay their staff the bare minimum, maybe build a practice facility under them, and repeat this cycle of kind of being good then sucking until we all grow old and die.

Yippee.

Which category would you put Hurley in? Obviously hindsight is 20/20 but I thought Hurley was a slam dunk hire. I don't know if a slam dunk hire currently exists at this point, at least from the realistic names I have seen thrown out.

Oh yeah Hurley was absolutely a slam dunk hire. If you go back to those early posts on this board, his name was probably the top of "exciting" names that we didn't think we'd get because he was the most obvious, on-the-radar, rising star in college hoops.

I left work to go to the presser. There were several hundred in the stands at Keaney.

I don't think that guy is out there right now.

[Jersey77]

If indeed the position does open up, it will all depend on how much they are willing to spend on a HC and staff.

This will be a massive rebuilding task and it will probably be a while before we are relevant again.

I don’t necessarily agree with that last point, unless we have different definitions of a massive rebuild and a while. In 14-15, the team was 13-5 in conference, only had a single holdover player (TJ), and was interesting and competitive. Plus, rhe program stuff is better now, and the transfer rules are different.

Ace not sure I get you.
In 2014-15, along with TJ we had EC, Martin, and Biruta all returning, plus Biggie and Reischel.

Granted it is easier with portal now, but you need to attract the impact transfers and they need to be available.

Even when Baron came in, we still had Woodward, Daniels, Smith, Mello, Evans, and Andingono.
We may have to fill close to an entire roster.

[ace]

If indeed the position does open up, it will all depend on how much they are willing to spend on a HC and staff.

This will be a massive rebuilding task and it will probably be a while before we are relevant again.

I don’t necessarily agree with that last point, unless we have different definitions of a massive rebuild and a while. In 14-15, the team was 13-5 in conference, only had a single holdover player (TJ), and was interesting and competitive. Plus, rhe program stuff is better now, and the transfer rules are different.

Ace not sure I get you.
In 2014-15, along with TJ we had EC, Martin, and Biruta all returning.

Granted it is easier with portal now, but you need to attract the impact transfers and they need to be available.

Even when Baron came in, we still had Woodward, Daniels, Smith, Mello, Evans, and Andingono.
We may have to fill close to an entire roster.

Holdover from the previous staff. Every other player was brought in by the new staff.

Hurley and company had Brooks, Nik, and Andre for a year and then Mike for a minute longer and and TJ. They started from scratch and built it pretty quickly.

[PeterRamTime]

There are 2 types of coaches here, obviously there are also significantly less likely options vs what we'll realistically (and un-excitedly) wind up with:

The pipe dream/wish it would happen/won't happen/should happen if we actually cared about basketball/but can't happen because we don't types:

Archie Miller/Chris Mack/Bobby Hurley - turns this program around in 2 years, with transfer rules being what they are. Names/splash from the hire gives us access to OOC games/tournaments we wouldn't get into until we're good again. Their names alone will recruit the kind of talent that can win in the A-10 by itself. Probably gives a shot in the arm to ticket sales and gives an immediate buzz back to Kingston.

Would also demand everything around the basketball program be invested in at a higher level. Probably would stick around longer than you'd think just because if they came here in the first place, it would mean we actually decided to invest in basketball.

The less excited/more realistic/"right" decision/safe/experienced/what we've always done types:

Everyone else - turns URI around (IF we guess right) in 4-6 years. May stay, might bounce once URI sniffs the tournament and they proved that the could win at a place that a lot of coaches don't.

Less exciting because it means we still don't want to invest at a high level. We're just going to go bargain basement hunting to get the "next" up and comer, pay the bare minimum, pay their staff the bare minimum, maybe build a practice facility under them, and repeat this cycle of kind of being good then sucking until we all grow old and die.

Yippee.

Why we wouldn't want to invest what is needed in the Men's basketball program is so stupid I can't wrap my head around it.

We know we can make it to the tournament and win and it's pretty easy to understand that succeeding in athletics is by far the best way to get as much exposure as possible to a University. Like FGCU when they made the sweet 16.

Or how about our last two trips to the NCAA tournament.

I used to live in Lynchburg VA and when I told people I was a Rhody fan they ask me if we were even D1...I mean outside of NE really, nobody knows who we are....BUT

That 2017 I had friends coming up to me "Oh my god Rhode Island almost beat Oregon I was at a bar and everybody was rooting so hard for yall to win!"

At every bar with TVs all over the place people were rooting for little Rhody to knock off Oregon. People actually knew and respected who we were.

But yeah let's just not try everything we can to cultivate that kind of success...

[theblueram]

The one question I ask myself when looking at potential hires is "Can they get an At Large bid". A coach like Becker who gets in by AQ, doesn't excite me. Probably the reason he is still in Vermont.

[Jersey77]

I don’t necessarily agree with that last point, unless we have different definitions of a massive rebuild and a while. In 14-15, the team was 13-5 in conference, only had a single holdover player (TJ), and was interesting and competitive. Plus, rhe program stuff is better now, and the transfer rules are different.

Ace not sure I get you.
In 2014-15, along with TJ we had EC, Martin, and Biruta all returning.

Granted it is easier with portal now, but you need to attract the impact transfers and they need to be available.

Even when Baron came in, we still had Woodward, Daniels, Smith, Mello, Evans, and Andingono.
We may have to fill close to an entire roster.

Holdover from the previous staff. Every other player was brought in by the new staff.

Hurley and company had Brooks, Nik, and Andre for a year and then Mike for a minute longer and and TJ. They started from scratch and built it pretty quickly.

Well yeah but it did take some time, fans on this board aren't that patient, they are looking for an NCAAT in 2-3 years.

Besides not sure there is a Hurley type out there, that we can get.
Aside from his ability he also had the name and pedigree to be able to close the deal on impact transfers and recruits.

[rjv]

Current coaches.
Wintrop Mark Prosser
Wangner Bashir Mason

I believe you bring in a young energized coach who can turn the program around and understand that coach will leave in 3-5 years. Its the next coach that is hired that can continue the growth of the program that is the key...coaches move unless you can pay the big salaries!!!

[PeterRamTime]

The one question I ask myself when looking at potential hires is "Can they get an At Large bid". A coach like Becker who gets in by AQ, doesn't excite me. Probably the reason he is still in Vermont.

He would for sure be an upgrade. I alot of the recruiting issues could be taken care of by hiring good assistants.

There wouldn't be any buzz though and our Hurley success would continue to fade.

Right now it's still fresh enough that we can still cultivate some of it with a great hire like Mack, Archie and Bobby.

Ya never know though

Virginia Tech hired Mike Young from Wofford whose program there was similar to Vermonts. Dominate, made it to tournaments. Ya know, bunch of white dudes who can shoot.

And he's got VT rolling right where Buzz Williams left off in year 3. Recruits well, brought a couple guys from Wofford who can really play.

Becker could come in here, keep some of Cox guys that have used up their one time transfer, bring a couple dudes from Vermont who can actually fucking shoot and score points from the guard position and we could be competitive immediately.

[Jersey77]

The one question I ask myself when looking at potential hires is "Can they get an At Large bid". A coach like Becker who gets in by AQ, doesn't excite me. Probably the reason he is still in Vermont.

He would for sure be an upgrade. I alot of the recruiting issues could be taken care of by hiring good assistants.

There wouldn't be any buzz though and our Hurley success would continue to fade.

Right now it's still fresh enough that we can still cultivate some of it with a great hire like Mack, Archie and Bobby.

Ya never know though

Virginia Tech hired Mike Young from Wofford whose program there was similar to Vermonts. Dominate, made it to tournaments. Ya know, bunch of white dudes who can shoot.

And he's got VT rolling right where Buzz Williams left off in year 3. Recruits well, brought a couple guys from Wofford who can really play.

Becker could come in here, keep some of Cox guys that have used up their one time transfer, bring a couple dudes from Vermont who can actually fucking shoot and score points from the guard position and we could be competitive immediately.

Forget about players using up their one-time transfer
That doesn't mean anything, almost all transfers are approved immediate waivers, especially if there is a coaching change.

[3mm's]

Pat Chambers
Let go at Penn State after a bad comment and now trying to rebuild his name at LaSalle as an assistant.

[Jersey77]

Pat Chambers
Let go at Penn State after a bad comment and now trying to rebuild his name at LaSalle as an assistant.

UGH, no thanks.

[RIFan]

It’s ok if you get a rep as a program that a hot young coach can go to and make a name for themselves…it’s mutually beneficial. If things go well then the stature of the program will improve and then ultimately you may be able to pay enough and find the right coach who is willing to stay a while and be successful. With one big caveat…we need to have the guts to call it like we see it, and move on from a bad hire that can derail the process, but not too soon that we get the reputation for not giving them a fair chance. 3-4 seasons depending on the situation seems reasonable to me.

[ace]

Ace not sure I get you.
In 2014-15, along with TJ we had EC, Martin, and Biruta all returning.

Granted it is easier with portal now, but you need to attract the impact transfers and they need to be available.

Even when Baron came in, we still had Woodward, Daniels, Smith, Mello, Evans, and Andingono.
We may have to fill close to an entire roster.

Holdover from the previous staff. Every other player was brought in by the new staff.

Hurley and company had Brooks, Nik, and Andre for a year and then Mike for a minute longer and and TJ. They started from scratch and built it pretty quickly.

Well yeah but it did take some time, fans on this board aren't that patient, they are looking for an NCAAT in 2-3 years.

Besides not sure there is a Hurley type out there, that we can get.
Aside from his ability he also had the name and pedigree to be able to close the deal on impact transfers and recruits.

Is that true, though? Taking anything from a message board as rational or representative is always dicey. Even so, you think people would be losing their minds with a rapidly improving program that goes 13-5 in conference by year 3? I think most people would sign up for that. Dan did well at Rhody, but what he did is not that unheard of or special. He just did his job well, others could, too.

But I still don’t understand what you want to happen. They can hire a new coach or keep the current one. That’s it. Both come with their own challenges.

[Jersey77]

Holdover from the previous staff. Every other player was brought in by the new staff.

Hurley and company had Brooks, Nik, and Andre for a year and then Mike for a minute longer and and TJ. They started from scratch and built it pretty quickly.

Well yeah but it did take some time, fans on this board aren't that patient, they are looking for an NCAAT in 2-3 years.

Besides not sure there is a Hurley type out there, that we can get.
Aside from his ability he also had the name and pedigree to be able to close the deal on impact transfers and recruits.

Is that true, though? Taking anything from a message board as rational or representative is always dicey. Even so, you think people would be losing their minds with a rapidly improving program that goes 13-5 in conference by year 3? I think most people would sign up for that. Dan did well at Rhody, but what he did is not that unheard of or special. He just did his job well, others could, too.

But I still don’t understand what you want to happen. They can hire a new coach or keep the current one. That’s it. Both come with their own challenges.

I tend to be more patient than others here, but I still need to see this program at least trending in a positive direction.

Obviously, I am extremely disappointed and certainly didn't expect to see the wheels come off.
I felt this team would have too much talent to let that happen.
Granted I didn't expect us to crack the top tier but did want us to be much more competitive.

Unless there is a miracle run, we all have a pretty good idea what the end game will be.

[giovanni]

I've never been as down on this program and depressed with the state of this program in all the years of following them going back to the 1970's, with The exception of the 2 Jerry d years. At this point , I'd like to think "big" and be optimistic, but I am beaten down and pessimistic about what will happen. At this point I think any new coach would create some excitement and pump at least a little energy to a program that's on life support.

[giovanni]

Well yeah but it did take some time, fans on this board aren't that patient, they are looking for an NCAAT in 2-3 years.

Besides not sure there is a Hurley type out there, that we can get.
Aside from his ability he also had the name and pedigree to be able to close the deal on impact transfers and recruits.

Is that true, though? Taking anything from a message board as rational or representative is always dicey. Even so, you think people would be losing their minds with a rapidly improving program that goes 13-5 in conference by year 3? I think most people would sign up for that. Dan did well at Rhody, but what he did is not that unheard of or special. He just did his job well, others could, too.

But I still don’t understand what you want to happen. They can hire a new coach or keep the current one. That’s it. Both come with their own challenges.

I tend to be more patient than others here, but I still need to see this program at least trending in a positive direction.

Obviously, I am extremely disappointed and certainly didn't expect to see the wheels come off.
I felt this team would have too much talent to let that happen.
Granted I didn't expect us to crack the top tier but did want us to be much more competitive.

Unless there is a miracle run, we all have a pretty good idea what the end game will be.

The talent is grossly overrated by many, though it certainly is better than the performance we have seen. It would be interesting to see what they would do with any direction and guidance of a better coach

[PlayMikeMotenMore]

There are 2 types of coaches here, obviously there are also significantly less likely options vs what we'll realistically (and un-excitedly) wind up with:

The pipe dream/wish it would happen/won't happen/should happen if we actually cared about basketball/but can't happen because we don't types:

Archie Miller/Chris Mack/Bobby Hurley - turns this program around in 2 years, with transfer rules being what they are. Names/splash from the hire gives us access to OOC games/tournaments we wouldn't get into until we're good again. Their names alone will recruit the kind of talent that can win in the A-10 by itself. Probably gives a shot in the arm to ticket sales and gives an immediate buzz back to Kingston.

Would also demand everything around the basketball program be invested in at a higher level. Probably would stick around longer than you'd think just because if they came here in the first place, it would mean we actually decided to invest in basketball.

The less excited/more realistic/"right" decision/safe/experienced/what we've always done types:

Everyone else - turns URI around (IF we guess right) in 4-6 years. May stay, might bounce once URI sniffs the tournament and they proved that the could win at a place that a lot of coaches don't.

Less exciting because it means we still don't want to invest at a high level. We're just going to go bargain basement hunting to get the "next" up and comer, pay the bare minimum, pay their staff the bare minimum, maybe build a practice facility under them, and repeat this cycle of kind of being good then sucking until we all grow old and die.

Yippee.

Don't necessarily agree with this assessment although I understand where you're coming from.

1. Some of these "high profile" coaches have baggage. Some schools don't want to deal with baggage for a number of reasons which I won't get into.
2. Some of these coaches might have zero interest in URI...again for various reasons. (ego, geography, timing, etc.) So even if you wanted URI to call them and URI did, it's possible URI's calls don't get returned.
3. So you may think URI is a great job for them and why wouldn't they want to come and why wouldn't URI want to hire them? There's a lot of reasons for both.
4. For some coaches, it may be about the money. Let's be honest, not every school has a Brinks truck in their parking lot.
4. There's no such thing as a certain thing. The next URI coach might be able to turn URI into a winner much sooner that 4 years. Tom Penders did it in 1-year. Jim O'Brien did it at Ohio State. Dennis Gates, Gary Waters...all in 2-3 years.

Winning the press conference and "immediate buzz" is not the goal. Think longer term. The aforementioned coaches didn't win the press conference either. If you're not excited on day-1 of the hire, then that's too bad. (Oregon boosters were not excited with Dana Altman's hire.) Give the coach some time, some support...and see if he can win games. Perhaps you'll be more excited on day 365 than day 1. If that's the case, then I think you'll be OK.

[theblueram]

There are 2 types of coaches here, obviously there are also significantly less likely options vs what we'll realistically (and un-excitedly) wind up with:

The pipe dream/wish it would happen/won't happen/should happen if we actually cared about basketball/but can't happen because we don't types:

Archie Miller/Chris Mack/Bobby Hurley - turns this program around in 2 years, with transfer rules being what they are. Names/splash from the hire gives us access to OOC games/tournaments we wouldn't get into until we're good again. Their names alone will recruit the kind of talent that can win in the A-10 by itself. Probably gives a shot in the arm to ticket sales and gives an immediate buzz back to Kingston.

Would also demand everything around the basketball program be invested in at a higher level. Probably would stick around longer than you'd think just because if they came here in the first place, it would mean we actually decided to invest in basketball.

The less excited/more realistic/"right" decision/safe/experienced/what we've always done types:

Everyone else - turns URI around (IF we guess right) in 4-6 years. May stay, might bounce once URI sniffs the tournament and they proved that the could win at a place that a lot of coaches don't.

Less exciting because it means we still don't want to invest at a high level. We're just going to go bargain basement hunting to get the "next" up and comer, pay the bare minimum, pay their staff the bare minimum, maybe build a practice facility under them, and repeat this cycle of kind of being good then sucking until we all grow old and die.

Yippee.

Don't necessarily agree with this assessment although I understand where you're coming from.

1. Some of these "high profile" coaches have baggage. Some schools don't want to deal with baggage for a number of reasons which I won't get into.
2. Some of these coaches might have zero interest in URI...again for various reasons. (ego, geography, timing, etc.) So even if you wanted URI to call them and URI did, it's possible URI's calls don't get returned.
3. So you may think URI is a great job for them and why wouldn't they want to come and why wouldn't URI want to hire them? There's a lot of reasons for both.
4. For some coaches, it may be about the money. Let's be honest, not every school has a Brinks truck in their parking lot.
4. There's no such thing as a certain thing. The next URI coach might be able to turn URI into a winner much sooner that 4 years. Tom Penders did it in 1-year. Jim O'Brien did it at Ohio State. Dennis Gates, Gary Waters...all in 2-3 years.

Winning the press conference and "immediate buzz" is not the goal. Think longer term. The aforementioned coaches didn't win the press conference either. If you're not excited on day-1 of the hire, then that's too bad. (Oregon boosters were not excited with Dana Altman's hire.) Give the coach some time, some support...and see if he can win games. Perhaps you'll be more excited on day 365 than day 1. If that's the case, then I think you'll be OK.

What blather. Longer term? Like 4 years? If a coach can't come in and excite the base and recruits day one, he already lost. ARCHIE MILLER.

[rhodyblue12]

I'd prefer the big splash guy, and don't even care about anyone's past anymore.
The world has changed (paying kids, academics no longer a concern, player loyalty is gone). We need to change too.
Get me the guy that can pull in star players. Get the guy that can win.

That said, as nice as it is to dream, I think we are too cheap to pay the price necessary to get it done.
Hoping for "WOW", expecting "meh".

[section(105)]

…….roll this around your cheek and gums……Tammi…….ready for incoming fire…….

[theblueram]

…….roll this around your cheek and gums……Tammi…….ready for incoming fire…….

You are fired.

[rjv]

Great Idea except we can not pay her...She is going to get a huge pay raise and it is not coming from URI

[RIFan]

…….roll this around your cheek and gums……Tammi…….ready for incoming fire…….

Ha, I said that to my buddy at the woman’s game we went to.

[theblueram]

Great Idea except we can not pay her...She is going to get a huge pay raise and it is not coming from URI

Do you work for the state? Every post I see that says we can't pay for something makes me laugh.

[PlayMikeMotenMore]

There are 2 types of coaches here, obviously there are also significantly less likely options vs what we'll realistically (and un-excitedly) wind up with:

The pipe dream/wish it would happen/won't happen/should happen if we actually cared about basketball/but can't happen because we don't types:

Archie Miller/Chris Mack/Bobby Hurley - turns this program around in 2 years, with transfer rules being what they are. Names/splash from the hire gives us access to OOC games/tournaments we wouldn't get into until we're good again. Their names alone will recruit the kind of talent that can win in the A-10 by itself. Probably gives a shot in the arm to ticket sales and gives an immediate buzz back to Kingston.

Would also demand everything around the basketball program be invested in at a higher level. Probably would stick around longer than you'd think just because if they came here in the first place, it would mean we actually decided to invest in basketball.

The less excited/more realistic/"right" decision/safe/experienced/what we've always done types:

Everyone else - turns URI around (IF we guess right) in 4-6 years. May stay, might bounce once URI sniffs the tournament and they proved that the could win at a place that a lot of coaches don't.

Less exciting because it means we still don't want to invest at a high level. We're just going to go bargain basement hunting to get the "next" up and comer, pay the bare minimum, pay their staff the bare minimum, maybe build a practice facility under them, and repeat this cycle of kind of being good then sucking until we all grow old and die.

Yippee.

Don't necessarily agree with this assessment although I understand where you're coming from.

1. Some of these "high profile" coaches have baggage. Some schools don't want to deal with baggage for a number of reasons which I won't get into.
2. Some of these coaches might have zero interest in URI...again for various reasons. (ego, geography, timing, etc.) So even if you wanted URI to call them and URI did, it's possible URI's calls don't get returned.
3. So you may think URI is a great job for them and why wouldn't they want to come and why wouldn't URI want to hire them? There's a lot of reasons for both.
4. For some coaches, it may be about the money. Let's be honest, not every school has a Brinks truck in their parking lot.
4. There's no such thing as a certain thing. The next URI coach might be able to turn URI into a winner much sooner that 4 years. Tom Penders did it in 1-year. Jim O'Brien did it at Ohio State. Dennis Gates, Gary Waters...all in 2-3 years.

Winning the press conference and "immediate buzz" is not the goal. Think longer term. The aforementioned coaches didn't win the press conference either. If you're not excited on day-1 of the hire, then that's too bad. (Oregon boosters were not excited with Dana Altman's hire.) Give the coach some time, some support...and see if he can win games. Perhaps you'll be more excited on day 365 than day 1. If that's the case, then I think you'll be OK.

What blather. Longer term? Like 4 years? If a coach can't come in and excite the base and recruits day one, he already lost. ARCHIE MILLER.

Well if you label real-world examples as blather, then so be it. Don't let the facts get in the way of your story, I guess. I didn't say 4-years. You said if it's not a splash hire, then it would take 4 years. My point was with the names I mentioned that your point is not true.

But to you, it's all about day-1. Nothing beyond day-1 matters. That's like scoring after winning the opening tip-off and thinking you're going to necessarily win the game.

BlueRam's world: "URI is a high-profile, top-10 job nationally. All coaches should be knocking down the door to come to Kingston. URI has millions of dollars waiting on a contract because the Rams have thousands of deep pocketed donors. The A10 is a primo conference with a great TV package. And on top of that, URI doesn't care if you're the dirtiest coach around. Lie to school administrators? Lie to the NCAA? Act like a jerk? Have players turn their backs on you? You're qualified! Sign here!"

If Archie Miller wants to coach here, then fine. I'm with you. But I guess John Belein is not fine in your opinion because he doesn't excite you on day one. I'd prefer URI not hire a slime-ball coach. You want one of those?...then go root for those schools.

[theblueram]

Don't necessarily agree with this assessment although I understand where you're coming from.

1. Some of these "high profile" coaches have baggage. Some schools don't want to deal with baggage for a number of reasons which I won't get into.
2. Some of these coaches might have zero interest in URI...again for various reasons. (ego, geography, timing, etc.) So even if you wanted URI to call them and URI did, it's possible URI's calls don't get returned.
3. So you may think URI is a great job for them and why wouldn't they want to come and why wouldn't URI want to hire them? There's a lot of reasons for both.
4. For some coaches, it may be about the money. Let's be honest, not every school has a Brinks truck in their parking lot.
4. There's no such thing as a certain thing. The next URI coach might be able to turn URI into a winner much sooner that 4 years. Tom Penders did it in 1-year. Jim O'Brien did it at Ohio State. Dennis Gates, Gary Waters...all in 2-3 years.

Winning the press conference and "immediate buzz" is not the goal. Think longer term. The aforementioned coaches didn't win the press conference either. If you're not excited on day-1 of the hire, then that's too bad. (Oregon boosters were not excited with Dana Altman's hire.) Give the coach some time, some support...and see if he can win games. Perhaps you'll be more excited on day 365 than day 1. If that's the case, then I think you'll be OK.

What blather. Longer term? Like 4 years? If a coach can't come in and excite the base and recruits day one, he already lost. ARCHIE MILLER.

Well if you label real-world examples as blather, then so be it. Don't let the facts get in the way of your story, I guess. I didn't say 4-years. You said if it's not a splash hire, then it would take 4 years. My point was with the names I mentioned that your point is not true.

But to you, it's all about day-1. Nothing beyond day-1 matters. That's like scoring after winning the opening tip-off and thinking you're going to necessarily win the game.

BlueRam's world: "URI is a high-profile, top-10 job nationally. All coaches should be knocking down the door to come to Kingston. URI has millions of dollars waiting on a contract because the Rams have thousands of deep pocketed donors. The A10 is a primo conference with a great TV package. And on top of that, URI doesn't care if you're the dirtiest coach around. Lie to school administrators? Lie to the NCAA? Act like a jerk? Have players turn their backs on you? You're qualified! Sign here!"

If Archie Miller wants to coach here, then fine. I'm with you. But I guess John Belein is not fine in your opinion because he doesn't excite you on day one. I'd prefer URI not hire a slime-ball coach. You want one of those?...then go root for those schools.

You said think longer term not me. What is your longer term then. I suggested 4 years. Belein would be a good hire. You brought up baggage. You said not winning on day one with the hire is not the goal but long term is. How long? I said 4 years? You didn't answer that. We need a coach who on day 1 says Rhody is back, like when we hired Dan. Anyone else, who needs 4 years to prove themselves? PASS.

[Rhode_Island_Red]

Winning the press conference and "immediate buzz" is not the goal. Think longer term. The aforementioned coaches didn't win the press conference either. If you're not excited on day-1 of the hire, then that's too bad. (Oregon boosters were not excited with Dana Altman's hire.) Give the coach some time, some support...and see if he can win games. Perhaps you'll be more excited on day 365 than day 1. If that's the case, then I think you'll be OK.

This x1,000

[ramster]

This is my pick