New Rivals 150

#101
#101
BigZiti09 said:
Guess the AD thought they'd rather have Martin at 1.3 than Marshall at $3. It's easy to say Marshall would've been great hire since he's fresh off his final 4 run. He's interviewed for UT job multiple times and South Carolina as well. Must be some reason he's been turned down.

I'm not knocking the hire of CCM. But my expectations for UT won't change because of who the head coach is. It's a good program with great facilities and enough in state and regional talent to win.
Click to expand...

Like I said, I wouldn't buy a Kia and expect it to perform like a BMW. I don't expect Martin to be as good a coach as say Pearl was, I hope he runs out to be, but I'm not needsariky expecting it.

That doesn't meant expectations for the program are lower, I still expect this program to be better, but ill take that out on the AD an not the coach.
 
#103
#103
volbeast33 said:
I prefer to use 247 which has us at 20 and dropping right now. Honestly ESPN is my least favorite and I never look at it. I think my grandpa is ranked a 4* by them.
Click to expand...

Add one more top 150 commitment on 247 and we will go up quite a bit, we will finish top 25 on their site I would just about guarantee.
 
#104
#104
bleedingTNorange said:
Like I said, I wouldn't buy a Kia and expect it to perform like a BMW. I don't expect Martin to be as good a coach as say Pearl was, I hope he runs out to be, but I'm not needsariky expecting it.

That doesn't meant expectations for the program are lower, I still expect this program to be better, but ill take that out on the AD an not the coach.
Click to expand...

Why dont you expect it? Bruce Pearl started out at 800,000 a yr here.....granted there has been some inflation but I am positive that wasnt top of the line money. The same expectations should be held for all UT coaches.
 
#105
#105
volbeast33 said:
Why dont you expect it? Bruce Pearl started out at 800,000 a yr here.....granted there has been some inflation but I am positive that wasnt top of the line money. The same expectations should be held for all UT coaches.
Click to expand...

I expect the program to be at that level, but not necessarily the coaches. That doesn't mean keep Zo around if he keeps repeating the first 2 years though.

I'm a firm believer in that you get what you pay for. You hire and pay enough low major coaches you'll eventually find a diamond in the rough (Pearl/Bucth), but most of the time it doesn't work out well. If you have high expectations for the program then you should seek a head coach who has proven he can coach at that level IMO.

You don't have to agree with my option, it'll be ok.
 
Last edited:
#106
#106
bleedingTNorange said:
Like I said, I wouldn't buy a Kia and expect it to perform like a BMW. I don't expect Martin to be as good a coach as say Pearl was, I hope he runs out to be, but I'm not needsariky expecting it.

That doesn't meant expectations for the program are lower, I still expect this program to be better, but ill take that out on the AD an not the coach.
Click to expand...

I don't think we bought a Kia and expected it to be a BMW. I think we looked around and realized we were going to be buying a used Honda and pay new Lexus prices so we opted to take more of a risk on a less accomplished coach who seemed to be steadily improving each year in hopes we'd hit a homerun. And if Cuonzo didn't work out, he would be inexpensive to fire. Whereas, if you hire a guy with a huge contract, you'd have to pay a huge buyout as well if it didn't work out.
 
#107
#107
BigZiti09 said:
I don't think we bought a Kia and expected it to be a BMW. I think we looked around and realized we were going to be buying a used Honda and pay new Lexus prices so we opted to take more of a risk on a less accomplished coach who seemed to be steadily improving each year in hopes we'd hit a homerun. And if Cuonzo didn't work out, he would be inexpensive to fire. Whereas, if you hire a guy with a huge contract, you'd have to pay a huge buyout as well if it didn't work out.
Click to expand...

I do mostly agree with that, I just wasn't agreeing with the whole Martin was the best we could get theory.
 
#108
#108
bleedingTNorange said:
I do mostly agree with that, I just wasn't agreeing with the whole Martin was the best we could get theory.
Click to expand...

I think it had a lot less to do with the state of our bball program and much more to do with the state of the AD as a whole. The AD had been bleeding money with football in a big lull and having to pay a lot of coaches' buyouts. IMO the decision was made to hire a promising up and comer on the cheap and hope that he turns into a great coach. Then in a few more years hopefully be in a financial situation to either give him the raise he's earned or start shopping for a bigger name.
 
#109
#109
jjay2518 said:
I think it had a lot less to do with the state of our bball program and much more to do with the state of the AD as a whole. The AD had been bleeding money with football in a big lull and having to pay a lot of coaches' buyouts. IMO the decision was made to hire a promising up and comer on the cheap and hope that he turns into a great coach. Then in a few more years hopefully be in a financial situation to either give him the raise he's earned or start shopping for a bigger name.
Click to expand...

I agree, and that's likely what'll happen.
 
#113
#113
GoobieVol said:
:popcorn:
Click to expand...

Personally, I think Martin is going to be here for at least 5 years minimum. I think he's going to have a really good year this season and earn an extension. Next year's team will be very young but should still be a boderline tourney team.

This year is huge for Martin. If he has the success I think he will have in 2013-14, it will allow him a pass for the 2014-15 season in the event they miss the tourney. But then the 2015-16 season would again be the judgement year for CCM.

JMO.
 
#115
#115
BigZiti09 said:
Which?

Martin gets raise and extension....

...OR.....

He gets axed
Click to expand...

Idk which will happen, I hope the first but idk. I was just saying, the OP laid out what the AD wanted to happen, and I was saying It appears that's what's gonna happen is the exact map they laid out.
 
#117
#117
BigZiti09 said:
Tend to agree. "Compete for top 5 in SEC" is way too low. This program should be consistently in the top 3 in this league. The hoops program was neglected by Dickey and fans don't realize how great this program can be.
Click to expand...

I am going to preface this by saying that I am a really competitive person and anyone who knows me would know this. The reason I say it is because the natural response from my next comment is to say that I expect mediocrity.

History shows that this program cannot consistently be in the top 3 in the SEC. You can debate all you want about how important basketball was at UT, but it simply shows that, especially now with the addition of Missouri to the conference. I agree that we can be very competitive year in and year out. It makes the loss of Pearl that much more frustrating because he started out on top, and success and wins breed good recruiting. Then, you have to start all over once a new coach comes in. Even Pearl was 3rd in the East and 5th in the East his last two years.

UT basketball is kind of like UT football in that it has to overcome the lack of consistent talent within a 75 mile radius from its campus. UT football can overcome it because of a great tradition, facilities, and of course, winning. UT basketball has to win, period.

If you look at the SEC, there is no reason why teams like Alabama, Georgia, LSU, and Missouri shouldn't compete well on a yearly basis. They either have loads of talent around them or they have very loyal in-state populations. Georgia should be very disappointed with their program because they have ridiculous talent in that state. We all know it can be difficult for UT to recruit west of Nashville.

These are just things that our program has to overcome. That just means that CCM has to make the Dance and win and get the ball rolling. But, I just don't believe that people should automatically expect success because of who we are. Basketball is not the easiest job at UT, and as BTO has said- we don't pay big bucks for our coach.
 
Last edited:
#118
#118
VolGee4 said:
I am going to preface this by saying that I am a really competitive person and anyone who knows me would know this. The reason I say it is because the natural response from my next comment is to say that I expect mediocrity.

History shows that this program cannot consistently be in the top 3 in the SEC. You can debate all you want about how important basketball was at UT, but it simply shows that, especially now with the addition of Missouri to the conference. I agree that we can be very competitive year in and year out. It makes the loss of Pearl that much more frustrating because he started out on top, and success and wins breed good recruiting. Then, you have to start all over once a new coach comes in. Even Pearl was 3rd in the East and 5th in the East his last two years.

UT basketball is kind of like UT football in that it has to overcome the lack of consistent talent within a 75 mile radius from its campus. UT football can overcome it because of a great tradition, facilities, and of course, winning. UT basketball has to win, period.

If you look at the SEC, there is no reason why teams like Alabama, Georgia, LSU, and Missouri shouldn't compete well on a yearly basis. They either have loads of talent around them or they have very loyal in-state populations. Georgia should be very disappointed with their program because they have ridiculous talent in that state. We all know it can be difficult for UT to recruit west of Nashville.

These are just things that our program has to overcome. That just means that CCM has to make the Dance and win and get the ball rolling. But, I just don't believe that people should automatically expect success because of who we are. Basketball is not the easiest job at UT, and as BTO has said- we don't pay big bucks for our coach.
Click to expand...

I understand what you're getting at here. However, I'd say that Pearl has shown you can win here. We have made some really terrible hires here in the past. Basketball is a sport where you hire a good coach / good recruiter and you can win. UT shouldn't settle. You can pay big money, get a good coach, attract top talent and be a top program.

The other schools you mentioned such as Bama and Georgia don't care about hoops in the least. Their fans don't support it and their arenas are dumps.
 
#119
#119
BigZiti09 said:
I understand what you're getting at here. However, I'd say that Pearl has shown you can win here. We have made some really terrible hires here in the past. Basketball is a sport where you hire a good coach / good recruiter and you can win. UT shouldn't settle. You can pay big money, get a good coach, attract top talent and be a top program.

The other schools you mentioned such as Bama and Georgia don't care about hoops in the least. Their fans don't support it and their arenas are dumps.
Click to expand...

Those are fair comments, and I have been to Coleman Coliseum and agree with your assesment. The problem is that Bruce Pearl is arguably our best coach in history, and he stayed for 6 years.

I agree that you get what you pay for, but it seems our program is not willing to pay enormous money, and our program has been in situations where big names don't want to come. Who really would have come after Pearl was fired? Roster was going to be a mess, and there were still questions about our punishment.

Calipari is one of the few coaches where his location doesn't matter. All of the other coaches who can recruit nationally are mainly at blue-blood programs.

I am just pointing out that our history hasn't shown us to be a consistent top 3 SEC program, and history can be a good indicator.
 
#120
#120
VolGee4 said:
Those are fair comments, and I have been to Coleman Coliseum and agree with your assesment. The problem is that Bruce Pearl is arguably our best coach in history, and he stayed for 6 years.

I agree that you get what you pay for, but it seems our program is not willing to pay enormous money, and our program has been in situations where big names don't want to come. Who really would have come after Pearl was fired? Roster was going to be a mess, and there were still questions about our punishment.

Calipari is one of the few coaches where his location doesn't matter. All of the other coaches who can recruit nationally are mainly at blue-blood programs.

I am just pointing out that our history has shown us to be a consistent top 3 SEC program, and history can be a good indicator.
Click to expand...

We could have made a good hire when Kevin O'Neil left. Instead we hired Uncle Jed who took some of the most talented teams ever and squandered it. Then we could have made a good hire after axing him and we hired Buzz Peterson. Luckily, Hamilton cared enough to finally listen to Ernie Grunfield and hire Bruce.
 
#121
#121
bleedingTNorange said:
What I do find funny is that everyone seems to be saying let's go off rivals and not look anywhere else. Someone could just as easily come along and say, we have four 4* committed and a top 5 class currently and they would be 100% accurate. It a depends on what service you want to go off of, and lets be honest, outside of the top 20 it's mostly a crap shoot anyways.
Click to expand...

This is very true and it seems the guys we've got committed all appear to be ranked right around the cut off between 3* and 4*. In most cases, they are high 3* or low 4* if you will.
 
#122
#122
VolGee4 said:
Those are fair comments, and I have been to Coleman Coliseum and agree with your assesment. The problem is that Bruce Pearl is arguably our best coach in history, and he stayed for 6 years.

I agree that you get what you pay for, but it seems our program is not willing to pay enormous money, and our program has been in situations where big names don't want to come. Who really would have come after Pearl was fired? Roster was going to be a mess, and there were still questions about our punishment.

Calipari is one of the few coaches where his location doesn't matter. All of the other coaches who can recruit nationally are mainly at blue-blood programs.

I am just pointing out that our history hasn't shown us to be a consistent top 3 SEC program, and history can be a good indicator.
Click to expand...

You are obviously talking recent history instead of program history. If you look at our basketball program from an SEC history, you will find that we trail only KY as the second best program in the conference.
 
#123
#123
Personally, I don't like it when people look at history of schools over a 100 year period. What bearing does 1913 have on today?

But that doesn't mean Tennessee can't compete and be a top program in this conference. We should have more $ than most schools, more facilities than most, more fan support than most and then instate talent continues to grow and there's enough regional talent to support it.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top