Products You May Like
We’re happy to once again bring you a unique-but-fair piece of content that we publish each April. Every hiring cycle there is an impulse to “grade” new hirings. This practice is doomed to fail, as hot-take culture has led many a talking head and/or writer to looking foolish in attempt to be too bullish.
The very concept of grading requires submission of work. These coaches are evaluated too widely before ever blowing a whistle in practice at their new school, let alone coaching in a game. The most practical way to truly grade a coaching hire is to give it time.
And we do. Four years’ worth. Time is the greatest truth-teller, after all.
Why four years? It amounts to one full recruiting cycle, and that seems best, even in this age of hyper-transferring and general roster instability. Four years gives us 100-plus games worth of evidence … if a coach can last that long. We’re up to the Class of 2017. (You can read the four-years-post evaluations hires from 2013, 2014 and 2015 and 2016 here.)
Gonzaga has its best recruiting class in history. Listen to all about it here and subscribe to Eye on College Basketball
What led to change in 2017? The biggest headline came in June, when Thad Matta shockingly stepped down from Ohio State. Prior to that, Brad Underwood bailed on Oklahoma State for Illinois, which fired John Groce. Tom Crean was fired at Indiana and John Thompson III and Georgetown split. Steve Fisher retired after building San Diego State into something it had never been before. There were 16 jobs from Major Seven conferences and/or other notable programs that switched four years ago. Let’s break out the red pen and get to grading.
These assessments take into account everything that is attache to a coach’s term: overall record, league record, NCAA Tournament appearances (and success or lack thereof), recruiting accomplishments and off-court issues (where applicable).