Splash hire

clicheusername3

clicheusername3

Banned
Sorry to be so negative but with ISU hiring Hoiberg I have had to go back and reassess the Fran Macaffrey hire. Even though I only rated the hire at impact a 4-5 out 10. I've now gone back on that and will downgrade to a 2-3. We made a big noise and and ended up with a little peep. I think that three of the criteria many of us had were 1)unite the fanbase (based on the hire) 2)get people back to CHA (based on the hire) 3)create excitement (based on the hire). I don't think that any of these goals were accomplished.
 
Winning is the only thing that will do these three things. So if McCaffery wins we hired a great coach. We could have hired James Naismith and unless he won your criteria would not be met.
 
1. Coach Caff is recruiting much harder and better players in the last month than Lick had in 3 years

2. How can you judge on filling CHA when it is April?

3. He has reached out to the fan base in terms of newspaper ads, meeting students, soon to be I-Club circuit- doing a great job imo

Not a splash hire, a solid basketball decison. Alford was a splash hire- look how that turned out!
 
I agree with clicheusername3. I think Fran will be a good coach.

But I think Hoiberg will be a great coach sooner than Fran. Hoiberg 1)unites the fanbase (based on the hire) 2)will get people back to Hilton (based on the hire) 3)has already created excitement (based on the hire).
 
Cliche, if I could write you a prescription for Zoloft I would. You are such a downer.

Don't get confused by the smoke and mirrors coming out of Ames. Hoiberg has not had one minute of coaching experience.

At least initially McCaffery appears to be a good hire, bordering on great. He appears to have the energy, work ethic, communication skills, POSITIVE outlook and contacts to turn Iowa around. We won't know whether he's successful at that for another three or four years.

Far too early to dismiss his hiring. Similarly far too early to say Hoiberg will be able to work magic in Ames.
 
Last edited:
clicheusername3 said:
Sorry to be so negative but with ISU hiring Hoiberg I have had to go back and reassess the Fran Macaffrey hire. Even though I only rated the hire at impact a 4-5 out 10. I've now gone back on that and will downgrade to a 2-3. We made a big noise and and ended up with a little peep. I think that three of the criteria many of us had were 1)unite the fanbase (based on the hire) 2)get people back to CHA (based on the hire) 3)create excitement (based on the hire). I don't think that any of these goals were accomplished.
Click to expand...

Well, if it was as simple as hiring a former alum as a splash hire then Houston would have rocked Conference USA 1998-2000 when Clyde "The Glide" Drexler coached his alma mater. You might want to look at their record during those two dismal years (perhaps Pollard should have checked the books on that one too). It wasn't exactly a great time for Cougar basketball.

Was Fran a great hire? I think so, but we'll see when the record books are written over the next couple years. You cannot accomplish any of your three goals simply based on a hire without results on the court. No matter who it is... after 1-2 years (again check out Houston) the fan base will give up on a coach if he's not winning - even if he's a local legend. I'm not saying Hoiberg is a bad hire, but it certainly is a reach.

So, while I agree none of your three "goals" were probably achieved at the moment of hire, I do not think it really matters. No sustained level of fan support, game attendance or "excitement" are attained off of a hire - you gotta win. Winning will achieve all three of your goals. In the end - winning or not winning is what Coach Fran (and all coaches) will be measured by...
 
clicheusername3 said:
Sorry to be so negative but with ISU hiring Hoiberg I have had to go back and reassess the Fran Macaffrey hire. Even though I only rated the hire at impact a 4-5 out 10. I've now gone back on that and will downgrade to a 2-3. We made a big noise and and ended up with a little peep. I think that three of the criteria many of us had were 1)unite the fanbase (based on the hire) 2)get people back to CHA (based on the hire) 3)create excitement (based on the hire). I don't think that any of these goals were accomplished.
Click to expand...


As others have said, winning is the most important criteria. To me, the 3 criteria you gave are all basically the same, not 3 separate.

Gene Chizik created a lot of excitement and increased ticket sales at ISU. Clearly that is not what is most important.
 
I'll let you know in 3 - 5 yrs. who's hire was the better. I guess with the exception of 1 game each yr. I hope that both programs are successful. I think there's room in the state for 2 quality programs and in the long run, it's good for the state!
 
clicheusername3 said:
Sorry to be so negative but with ISU hiring Hoiberg I have had to go back and reassess the Fran Macaffrey hire. Even though I only rated the hire at impact a 4-5 out 10. I've now gone back on that and will downgrade to a 2-3. We made a big noise and and ended up with a little peep. I think that three of the criteria many of us had were 1)unite the fanbase (based on the hire) 2)get people back to CHA (based on the hire) 3)create excitement (based on the hire). I don't think that any of these goals were accomplished.
Click to expand...

It's ridiculous to try and evaluate a coaching hire right away. We need to wait a couple years before we can even begin to decide who was a better hire. Who cares if the coach creates excitement and sells tickets right away if they don't win? It all comes down to wins and losses, if we win, fans will come to CHA and be excited about the program.

When Alford was hired there was all kinds of excitement around the program at that time, obvioulsly that didn't last. When Ferentz was hired most people had never heard of him and were upset that we didn't get Stoops. Looking back its clear that the exciting hire wasn't the better hire.
 
edgyhawk said:
I'll let you know in 3 - 5 yrs. who's hire was the better. I guess with the exception of 1 game each yr. I hope that both programs are successful. I think there's room in the state for 2 quality programs and in the long run, it's good for the state!
Click to expand...

I was basing my angle on the hire and this down period before the season starts. Its no fun to just wait and see who wins and then say "oh I told you so" or "see were winning so everything is fine"...I think if you look back on this board that a vast majority of folks were wanting a splash hire and we got a toothpick dive...
 
Who is excited about Feddy besides ISU people? I guess if you talk to Dicky V and Jay Bilas they both think it's a nice hire but they said the same thing about Fran. Iowa was in a spot where they couldn't hire a guy like Fred because of where the program has been the last decade. I like Fred but I don't think it's going to be as easy as some people make it out to be for him. Great college player, some NBA experience doesn't mean he can walk into a recruits home and get that player to play for him. The Iowa fan base warmed up to Fran pretty quick, he won't sell as many tickets as Hoiberg will but I think Iowa has the right guy for what we need. ISU may have the right guy to but I would concerned about the lack of coaching and recruiting experience on the ISU staff as of now. I have no clue who Fred can bring in to be his right hand man that will be able to teach him to coach and recruit. Hoiberg's name isn't one that will ring in the ears of recruits unless that recruit has been a Cyclone all his life, it's an advantage for Fred to have been the places he has been but it is going to take some time for him to take advantage of that. Who knows if Fred is going to clean house or take all current players and recruits in. Things change, only time will tell.
 
I seriously got a kick out of the response from fellow Hawkeye fans on this board on the Fred hire. Only time will tell but IMO it's a great hire for them. Fred is very professional in everything that he does. He is a no-nonsense individual. Pollard took a risk. Will know in 3 to 4 years what type of risk this was.
 
HawkeyeMike23 said:
It's ridiculous to try and evaluate a coaching hire right away. We need to wait a couple years before we can even begin to decide who was a better hire. Who cares if the coach creates excitement and sells tickets right away if they don't win? It all comes down to wins and losses, if we win, fans will come to CHA and be excited about the program.

When Alford was hired there was all kinds of excitement around the program at that time, obvioulsly that didn't last. When Ferentz was hired most people had never heard of him and were upset that we didn't get Stoops. Looking back its clear that the exciting hire wasn't the better hire.
Click to expand...

It is not ridiculous to try and evaluate a coaching hire right away. The "hire" is entirely different from "wins and losses."

Fran may well be a great coach for Iowa, and Hoiberg may flop in five years. But right now, Hoiberg is bringing the magic back to Hilton, and it sounds like he's not going to flop.
 
Once the novelty wears off the only thing will be if he wins or not. This is great for offseason buzz, but if it doesn't carry over to the court than what is the point?
 
Where's that message board guy I hate thread at? Message Board guy I hate: buzzkill guy that posts on every discussion "winning cures everything" "winning will solve world hunger" "winning will prevent global warming"...dudes get in the discussion...
 
clicheusername3 said:
I was basing my angle on the hire and this down period before the season starts. Its no fun to just wait and see who wins and then say "oh I told you so" or "see were winning so everything is fine"...I think if you look back on this board that a vast majority of folks were wanting a splash hire and we got a toothpick dive...
Click to expand...

It isn't fun to read this drivel either.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top