ADVERTISEMENT

NCAA Coaching Carousel

Random thought since folks keep talking about meeting with Hallock, which I know is facetious.

Would Hardt/Hallock take a meeting with season tickets holders, ex-season ticket holders, alumni about MBB? What if we banded together and presented him and Hallock with a factual look (from our vantage point) of the program. We discuss all of the facts on ad nasuem, what if they were put in a letter, requesting a meeting. Would they just ignore the letter, give us some type of form letter response, or might they hear us out?

Just asking.
 
If there was a large enough group to have impact, and they respectfully requested an opportunity to explain why they have not given money, bought tickets, etc for extended period of time. They mat well get an audience, especially if agree will make gift for opportunity to be heard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 97spiderfan
urfan1 said:
If there was a large enough group to have impact, and they respectfully requested an opportunity to explain why they have not given money, bought tickets, etc for extended period of time. They mat well get an audience, especially if agree will make gift for opportunity to be heard.
Click to expand...
Thanks Fan1, I'm a season ticket holder so I doubt they will miss that from me. Other's may have more clout/financial resources to make an impact. No offense, but I'm not giving them $$$ for a meeting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpiderGuy and Spiders4ever
Eight Legger said:
Let's assume for a second that Hardt is not an entirely clueless maroon and that when he gave this extension, he also included a very favorable buyout clause and/or conditions that would cause the extension to fully vest only if performance standards are met, like say, winning more than eight D1 games a season.

Considering there was literally no reason to give an extension last year, I'd say this is a completely reasonable expectation. In that case, another bad season next year could be it.
Click to expand...
I have no confidence in Hardt. Bad decision on last extension. Buyout clause or not, I’d be shocked if CM doesn’t last AT LEAST 4 more years. Not a good feel here. Odds of making another NCAA appearance in those 4 years. Maybe as in striking distance of the norm of 6 and 1/3.
 
urfan1 said:
If there was a large enough group to have impact, and they respectfully requested an opportunity to explain why they have not given money, bought tickets, etc for extended period of time. They mat well get an audience, especially if agree will make gift for opportunity to be heard.
Click to expand...

So you're saying that we have to pay to get an audience? What, are we seeing the King?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Mo 2.0 and 8legs1dream
MrTbone said:
Do you know a lot of CEOs who have an open door policy to come in and complain about their product? That’s in essence what you’re suggesting…
Click to expand...

Well I wasn't suggesting anything. I was just responding to "make gift for an opportunity to be heard".

A billboard is probably cheaper than that anyway...
 
SFspidur said:
Four. His extension after the 2022 tourney was through 2027, and then they extended him again after last season. Term was not announced, but JOC said according to sources it was two more years, so 2029.
Click to expand...
So he has 4 more seasons? Has UR ever dismissed a coach who is still under contract?
 
Last edited:
Mooney, Greenberg, and Enfield on Chu heading to Radford...

Mooney had recommended Chu get into coaching when Chu played for the Spiders.

“He’s very impressive and he’s very bright and a great communicator, so I thought he would have a chance to be successful in anything. … I thought he could really do very well in coaching,” Mooney said.

Mooney said Chu is ready to be a head coach.

“Because everything has evolved so fast and so dramatically (in college basketball) in the past three years, I think he is ready,” Mooney said. “When you’re in the NBA, while that is a different experience than college, it’s basketball 365.”

Mooney has discussed analytics with Chu.

“If somebody says, ‘Well, you guys made 31% of your shots from that area of the floor at this time in the game,’ that doesn’t mean anything. But he can give you the reasons why it does mean something … and how you can improve upon that,” Mooney said. “He takes the analytics and he can make things applicable and practical in the way he describes it.”
Click to expand...

roanoke.com

SMU coach Enfield says Chu 'home-run' hire for Radford

Andy Enfield, Seth Greenberg and Chris Mooney had high praise for the new Radford coach.
roanoke.com roanoke.com
 
I believe the years on the contract a few years ago and amount owed to Mooney if fired was a barrier to making that decision. And that barrier has probably only gotten larger as I don't expect the buyout to be any less. I think it is safe to assume his buyout or amount owed if fired would be the remainder of his contract. BUT - now also add in the 1, 2 or 3 million dollars the University must set aside for the NIL Payments/i.e payments straight to players.

SO - give that, I have a hard time believing even after next year, assuming we have another bad year - that the school would be willing to pay Mooney a couple million to NOT coach UR, and then also have to pay a new coach, likely at least 750K or more, and then continue to get 1,2,3 million (whatever the amount is because the school will not say)

One name to look out for on this carousel is Hovde at Florida. If Florida makes a run to the final four, like many experts think they will do - I wonder if his name comes up for jobs either this year or next year.

I like the Chu hire at Radford. Its a gamble for sure as he is mostly an analytics guy it seems, but I think that is something underutilized in college hoops at this point and maybe something Radford can exploit for some quick success.
 
SpiderTrap said:
I believe the years on the contract a few years ago and amount owed to Mooney if fired was a barrier to making that decision. And that barrier has probably only gotten larger as I don't expect the buyout to be any less. I think it is safe to assume his buyout or amount owed if fired would be the remainder of his contract. BUT - now also add in the 1, 2 or 3 million dollars the University must set aside for the NIL Payments/i.e payments straight to players.

SO - give that, I have a hard time believing even after next year, assuming we have another bad year - that the school would be willing to pay Mooney a couple million to NOT coach UR, and then also have to pay a new coach, likely at least 750K or more, and then continue to get 1,2,3 million (whatever the amount is because the school will not say)

One name to look out for on this carousel is Hovde at Florida. If Florida makes a run to the final four, like many experts think they will do - I wonder if his name comes up for jobs either this year or next year.

I like the Chu hire at Radford. Its a gamble for sure as he is mostly an analytics guy it seems, but I think that is something underutilized in college hoops at this point and maybe something Radford can exploit for some quick success.
Click to expand...
Hodve certainly is gaining ground with where he is at and has seen competition at the very best level. Would love to have him and stop hearing "Richmond and the Princeton offense".
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1
SpiderTrap said:
I believe the years on the contract a few years ago and amount owed to Mooney if fired was a barrier to making that decision. And that barrier has probably only gotten larger as I don't expect the buyout to be any less. I think it is safe to assume his buyout or amount owed if fired would be the remainder of his contract. BUT - now also add in the 1, 2 or 3 million dollars the University must set aside for the NIL Payments/i.e payments straight to players.

SO - give that, I have a hard time believing even after next year, assuming we have another bad year - that the school would be willing to pay Mooney a couple million to NOT coach UR, and then also have to pay a new coach, likely at least 750K or more, and then continue to get 1,2,3 million (whatever the amount is because the school will not say)
Click to expand...

I wouldn't assume that. Just because buyouts in contracts that pay less than the total amount remaining are fairly common. They also can have offset clauses where you pay the difference of what they get paid at future job they r required to seek. Some of those buyouts r negotiated after dismissal. Remove offset, take a different buyout. But often negotiated either way - if a coach owes or school owes.

Now some contracts u owe 100%. No idea about UR bc we have zero transparency.

If we don't have a buyout we've done it wrong imo. That would be on Hallock and Hardt just like the last extension. Given Moon agent's ability to run circles around our admin we can very well be 1 of those that owe 100%.

But even if we have a buyout, would it be enough to play a role in firing him early? No unlikely. And I agree that I don't see any way he's in jeopardy even if next season is bad. Unfortunately.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eight Legger
I just have a feeling when UR inked Mooney to his original 10 year deal after the back to back appearances, that part of the reason UR was able to keep him was the long term deal and likely (your right - we never know because of lack of transparency) full commitment from the school to guarantee the deal from the start. I would expect the offsets to be in there if another job is taken - that is very common and usually agreeable on both sides. So if that is the case (assuming) I find it hard that in future extensions, they would remove that guarantee. Possible. But unlikely.

But I agree with you 100% - I don't think the school is even discussing replacing Mooney. He is safe next year and likely beyond just because of the history.
 
Spiders4ever said:
I don't think Princeton runs the Princeton offense anymore
Click to expand...
They really don't. It is basically too difficult to run effectively in the shorter shot clock days. Remember - up till 1993 shot clock was 45 seconds, then taken down to 35 in 1993, and then 30 in 2015. Going down to 30 was a big hit. By the time the ball gets over half court - your at 24 seconds. And we all know - the Princeton offense likes to create movement for about 10-15 seconds away from the basket to start to setup their offense, but then - you only got 7-9 seconds left to get a shot.

The other reason PO was so good is by holding the ball on offense, it limited defense. Limited possessions. But today - with 30 seconds - possessions are created.

I think Mooney and staff should do a full 180. Watch old school Loyola Marymount film all summer. And next year - lets just go full run and gun. Some key principles from that offense - take first 3 point shot available, everyone but shooter goes for rebound, constant full court pressure - with idea of giving up 2 point basket for 3 pointer on other end, typically shooting within first 10 seconds of shot clock. Catch everyone off guard, keep it a secret and first game lets score 120 points.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1
SpiderTrap said:
I just have a feeling when UR inked Mooney to his original 10 year deal after the back to back appearances, that part of the reason UR was able to keep him was the long term deal and likely (your right - we never know because of lack of transparency) full commitment from the school to guarantee the deal from the start. I would expect the offsets to be in there if another job is taken - that is very common and usually agreeable on both sides. So if that is the case (assuming) I find it hard that in future extensions, they would remove that guarantee. Possible. But unlikely.

But I agree with you 100% - I don't think the school is even discussing replacing Mooney. He is safe next year and likely beyond just because of the history.
Click to expand...
The extensions were completely separate from the original contract, and two of them were signed by different ADs. We had literally no reason last year to a) give an extension at all, but more importantly b) give an extension whose terms we did not dictate completely.

For example: "Sure Chris, we'll give you an extension. You'll get two more years (through the 2029 season) at your current salary and can use that to help with recruiting. But if we let you go anytime before your existing contract expires (through the 2027 season), the buyout terms from that contract will apply and no additional buyout will be due for the extension years."

What was Mooney going to do? Retire? Leave for a better job? Of course not. He would either have signed that or just declined it and continued coaching on his existing deal. He's made it VERY clear that he will never leave here by choice to coach somewhere else, so we don't have to "protect" ourselves against the idea of him leaving voluntarily.

Or, Hardt could have said: "We'll give you the extension and increase the buyout amount by the value of the first year of the extension, but that's contingent upon the Spiders [making the NCAAs at least once by 2027/averaging at least 20 wins a year for the next three years/winning an A10 regular season or tournament championship in the next three years/etc]."

This really isn't that hard.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1
I might be an outlier in thinking, but I believe that after 20 yrs and then some, there is no way Mooney would ever be let go regardless of performance and regardless of how much or how little it would cost to end his tenure. I’d love to be proven wrong because me thinks it’s going to be a long and frustrating 4 more years. I just don’t think the decision makers have the willingness and fortitude to pull the plug.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpiderTrap and whampas
SpiderGuy said:
I might be an outlier in thinking, but I believe that after 20 yrs and then some, there is no way Mooney would ever be let go regardless of performance and regardless of how much or how little it would cost to end his tenure. I’d love to be proven wrong because me thinks it’s going to be a long and frustrating 4 more years. I just don’t think the decision makers have the willingness and fortitude to pull the plug.
Click to expand...
Agreed - what is more likely, Chris - we are moving on and you have 3 years left on your contract. We would like to make you a special assistant to the President and AD. In this role, you will help with fundraising and any other special project we need. Basically - work 10 hours a week at your current pay until the contract term is up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1
SpiderTrap said:
I believe the years on the contract a few years ago and amount owed to Mooney if fired was a barrier to making that decision. And that barrier has probably only gotten larger as I don't expect the buyout to be any less. I think it is safe to assume his buyout or amount owed if fired would be the remainder of his contract. BUT - now also add in the 1, 2 or 3 million dollars the University must set aside for the NIL Payments/i.e payments straight to players.

SO - give that, I have a hard time believing even after next year, assuming we have another bad year - that the school would be willing to pay Mooney a couple million to NOT coach UR, and then also have to pay a new coach, likely at least 750K or more, and then continue to get 1,2,3 million (whatever the amount is because the school will not say)

One name to look out for on this carousel is Hovde at Florida. If Florida makes a run to the final four, like many experts think they will do - I wonder if his name comes up for jobs either this year or next year.

I like the Chu hire at Radford. Its a gamble for sure as he is mostly an analytics guy it seems, but I think that is something underutilized in college hoops at this point and maybe something Radford can exploit for some quick success.
Click to expand...
Define “a bad year”. If CM puts up another 20 loss season, which is entirely plausible considering what we are currently returning, the seat gets pretty warm.

You are likely correct that UR doesn’t eat it, they’d probably just suffer for two more years while he muddled his way back to respectability. But I think a bad season is forthcoming in 2025-26 and the grumbling will get pretty loud.
 
Last edited:
SpiderTrap said:
They really don't. It is basically too difficult to run effectively in the shorter shot clock days. Remember - up till 1993 shot clock was 45 seconds, then taken down to 35 in 1993, and then 30 in 2015. Going down to 30 was a big hit. By the time the ball gets over half court - your at 24 seconds. And we all know - the Princeton offense likes to create movement for about 10-15 seconds away from the basket to start to setup their offense, but then - you only got 7-9 seconds left to get a shot.

The other reason PO was so good is by holding the ball on offense, it limited defense. Limited possessions. But today - with 30 seconds - possessions are created.

I think Mooney and staff should do a full 180. Watch old school Loyola Marymount film all summer. And next year - lets just go full run and gun. Some key principles from that offense - take first 3 point shot available, everyone but shooter goes for rebound, constant full court pressure - with idea of giving up 2 point basket for 3 pointer on other end, typically shooting within first 10 seconds of shot clock. Catch everyone off guard, keep it a secret and first game lets score 120 points.
Click to expand...
I think before each possession they should toss a coin that is Princeton on one side Loyola Marymount on the other. Run whatever it lands on that possession.
 
MrTbone said:
Define “a bad year”. If CM puts up another 30 loss season, which is entirely plausible considering what we are currently returning, the seat gets pretty warm.

You are likely correct that UR doesn’t eat it, they’d probably just suffer for two more years while he muddled his way back to respectability. But I think a bad season is forthcoming in 2025-26 and the grumbling will get pretty loud.
Click to expand...
Yes, a 30 loss season would make it pretty warm…
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Spiders4ever and Eight Legger
MrTbone said:
Define “a bad year”. If CM puts up another 30 loss season, which is entirely plausible considering what we are currently returning, the seat gets pretty warm.

You are likely correct that UR doesn’t eat it, they’d probably just suffer for two more years while he muddled his way back to respectability. But I think a bad season is forthcoming in 2025-26 and the grumbling will get pretty loud.
Click to expand...
Bad year for the administration is anything under .500.

If he is .500 next year or just slightly above - they will say its improvement.


Personally - if we are not in the discussion for the NCAA or NIT, its a bad year. So yeah - we could win 20 games and it be bad year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spiders4ever
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S

How many transfers do we need next season?

Replies
75
Views
3K
UR Basketball Board
RichmondNative
RichmondNative
9

It could be worse if we didn't have the new Practice Facility!

Replies
7
Views
785
UR Basketball Board
97spiderfan
97spiderfan
97spiderfan

Current NET ranking

Replies
8
Views
727
UR Basketball Board
wr70beh
wr70beh
Section9.RowD

Mens - @ St. Joes - Sat 2/22 12:30 PM USA Network

Replies
43
Views
3K
UR Basketball Board
MrTbone
MrTbone
Section9.RowD

Womens - URI @RC - Sun 2/2 2pm - ESPN+

Replies
16
Views
878
UR Basketball Board
SpiderLaw
S
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back