Cluess

[quote="Marillac" post=340731][quote="P Simmons" post=340724]Adam Zagoria
‏Verified account @AdamZagoria

Sources said Cluess has a "significant" buyout that is estimated to be in the neighborhood of $2 million.[/quote]

Lol

Good for you, Iona. This explains the pivot. What is Cragg’s buyout?[/quote]

Did Cragg beat you up in HS or something?
 
[quote="Section9" post=340726][quote="Johnnie Drama" post=340712][quote="MainMan" post=340708][quote="SJU61982" post=340705]
Big guys? That's another story. That's where you may have a beef with Cluess's recruiting, but I'll stay open-minded, because he's proven everything else, IMO.[/quote]

Cluess' best players were arguably Mike Glover, who played like a beast down low, and 6'9 David Laury, who was the league MVP.[/quote]

You can throw in Jordan Washington as well.[/quote]

Yeah, they beat up on low mid major teams, how's that gonna fly in the BE? And I'm hot excusing Chris from his small ball either.[/quote]

True, but I think it shows that he has had post players who have performed very well in his system. Not sure how many quality big men there have been in the MAAC in recent years.
 
[quote="SJU61982" post=340732][quote="Section9" post=340726][quote="Johnnie Drama" post=340712][quote="MainMan" post=340708][quote="SJU61982" post=340705]
Big guys? That's another story. That's where you may have a beef with Cluess's recruiting, but I'll stay open-minded, because he's proven everything else, IMO.[/quote]

Cluess' best players were arguably Mike Glover, who played like a beast down low, and 6'9 David Laury, who was the league MVP.[/quote]

You can throw in Jordan Washington as well.[/quote]

Yeah, they beat up on low mid major teams, how's that gonna fly in the BE? And I'm hot excusing Chris from his small ball either.[/quote]

These are exactly the same kind of questions Cluess faced when he went from high school ball to junior college.

He faced them again when he went from JC to college ball.

He faced them again when he went from D2 coaching, to D1 coaching.

The only constant in this, is that he has proven the so-called "experts" wrong every time. Maybe he won't this time, but IMO, the odds are overwhelmingly in his favor.[/quote]

All the steps you describe are baby steps compared to jumping to top D. 1 competition. I have absolutely no confidence that he pull it off at SJU.
 
So we have to pay Mullin the remaining 4 million on his deal then would have to pay a 2 million dollar buy out to higher Cluess that’s ridiculous there better be another candidate out there.
 
Last edited:
Why berate Cragg? He has done a great job here so far and has pulled all the right levers so far. We missed out on Hurley but that's only because we can't afford him even with Repole helping apparently. We will never win bidding wars with F5 schools. No one has technically been announced yet, but even if it's Cluess we have to give him a chance. Believe in Cragg until proven otherwise. I believe Paultz said it best when he said Cragg won't perform miracles but he will do the best he can or something similar. Hurley would've been a miracle because we don't have money to compete with ASU.
 
[quote="SJU14" post=340735][quote="Marillac" post=340731][quote="P Simmons" post=340724]Adam Zagoria
‏Verified account @AdamZagoria

Sources said Cluess has a "significant" buyout that is estimated to be in the neighborhood of $2 million.[/quote]

Lol

Good for you, Iona. This explains the pivot. What is Cragg’s buyout?[/quote]

Did Cragg beat you up in HS or something?[/quote]

He can’t beat Marillac up. Marillac runs a 4.15 40, with a 56 in vertical at 285 lbs of pure muscle.
 
[quote="Johnnie Drama" post=340736][quote="Section9" post=340726][quote="Johnnie Drama" post=340712][quote="MainMan" post=340708][quote="SJU61982" post=340705]
Big guys? That's another story. That's where you may have a beef with Cluess's recruiting, but I'll stay open-minded, because he's proven everything else, IMO.[/quote]

Cluess' best players were arguably Mike Glover, who played like a beast down low, and 6'9 David Laury, who was the league MVP.[/quote]

You can throw in Jordan Washington as well.[/quote]

Yeah, they beat up on low mid major teams, how's that gonna fly in the BE? And I'm hot excusing Chris from his small ball either.[/quote]

True, but I think it shows that he has had post players who have performed very well in his system. Not sure how many quality big men there have been in the MAAC in recent years.[/quote]

That's my point exactly. We got eaten alive last year by teams that didn't have the "talent" we did, they just kicked our butts in the paint because they were physically bigger and stronger.
 
[quote="Paultzman" post=340717]Is this the “lock” many have stated? My gut says there is more to the process.[/quote]

This mean we have another actual candidate, or we just can’t get things done with Cluess?
 
[quote="MCNPA" post=340743][quote="Paultzman" post=340717]Is this the “lock” many have stated? My gut says there is more to the process.[/quote]

This mean we have another actual candidate, or we just can’t get things done with Cluess?[/quote]

ABC

Anybody
But
Cluess
 
The only way I would agree this is a huge L for Cragg is if we try hiring Cluess and Iona beats us. LOL...imagine the board then?
 
[quote="Section9" post=340742][quote="Johnnie Drama" post=340736][quote="Section9" post=340726][quote="Johnnie Drama" post=340712][quote="MainMan" post=340708][quote="SJU61982" post=340705]
Big guys? That's another story. That's where you may have a beef with Cluess's recruiting, but I'll stay open-minded, because he's proven everything else, IMO.[/quote]

Cluess' best players were arguably Mike Glover, who played like a beast down low, and 6'9 David Laury, who was the league MVP.[/quote]

You can throw in Jordan Washington as well.[/quote]

Yeah, they beat up on low mid major teams, how's that gonna fly in the BE? And I'm hot excusing Chris from his small ball either.[/quote]

True, but I think it shows that he has had post players who have performed very well in his system. Not sure how many quality big men there have been in the MAAC in recent years.[/quote]

That's my point exactly. We got eaten alive last year by teams that didn't have the "talent" we did, they just kicked our butts in the paint because they were physically bigger and stronger.[/quote]

I agree, it drove me insane. Just saying that he has had very productive post players in his system. Regardless of the competition, they were successful. I'm assuming he would like to do the same here, but with guys with a bit more size. Don't know how many 6'10 quality big men are going to MAAC schools. Can definitely get them in the BE though.
 
[quote="MCNPA" post=340665][quote="Section3" post=340661][quote="kranmars" post=340647]What I fear most if Cluess is the choice, is he will not get a honeymoon period. It wil not be his fault of course, but he will take the bullets from an angry alum/fanbase.

And I normally give coaches here time to put their stamp on the program before giving my opinion.

But admittedly, I will be one of the frustrated with a Cluess hire, and will have work cut out to in order to keep my composure.[/quote]
If it happens, most will get on board. But, there will not be much patience for lack recruiting and on court performance. Tough position for new coach, but it comes with gig.

The crux of the problem is we will not growing off of our end of year position....chances are we will be effectively starting over...fans don’t want to start over and can’t blame them. I hope I am wrong, but I just don’t see TC coming in and creating a recruiting buzz which is absolutely what we needed in addition to putting those pieces into a system that wins against the type of competition we will face.[/quote]

Recruiting buzz?? Our last staff didn’t even recruit!! Not one of em except Matt. It takes work to land recruits, not a buzz. Buzz has little to do with it.[/quote]
We absolutely had recruiting buzz a5voutset of both the Lavin and Mullin hiring..and both brought talent to the table.. unfortunately neither recognized that it’s a 50 week a year job.
 
[quote="Section9" post=340726][quote="Johnnie Drama" post=340712][quote="MainMan" post=340708][quote="SJU61982" post=340705]
Big guys? That's another story. That's where you may have a beef with Cluess's recruiting, but I'll stay open-minded, because he's proven everything else, IMO.[/quote]

Cluess' best players were arguably Mike Glover, who played like a beast down low, and 6'9 David Laury, who was the league MVP.[/quote]

You can throw in Jordan Washington as well.[/quote]

Yeah, they beat up on low mid major teams, how's that gonna fly in the BE? And I'm hot excusing Chris from his small ball either.[/quote]

What kind of argument is this?

You could say that about anyone not coaching in a power conference.

Jim Calhoun beat up on his mid-major opponents while at Northeastern.
Rollie at Stony Brook
PJ at Wagner
Jim O'Brien at St. Bonnies
Ben Howland at Northern Arizona
Jay Wright at Hofstra.
Cooley at Fairfield.
And on and on.....
 
[quote="Mike Zaun" post=340739]Why berate Cragg? He has done a great job here so far and has pulled all the right levers so far. We missed out on Hurley but that's only because we can't afford him even with Repole helping apparently. We will never win bidding wars with F5 schools. No one has technically been announced yet, but even if it's Cluess we have to give him a chance. Believe in Cragg until proven otherwise. I believe Paultz said it best when he said Cragg won't perform miracles but he will do the best he can or something similar. Hurley would've been a miracle because we don't have money to compete with ASU.[/quote]

Why berate Mullin? Stop with your selective protections.

Cragg paid four mill to buyout a coach that made the tournament just to get kicked in the nuts by Hurley and then scramble to Cluess only to find that his buyout is two mill! Six mill for a slight improvement for a school that can’t even match a second tier university’s salary for its third most popular sport.

It’s a clown show.
 
[quote="MCNPA" post=340743][quote="Paultzman" post=340717]Is this the “lock” many have stated? My gut says there is more to the process.[/quote]

This mean we have another actual candidate, or we just can’t get things done with Cluess?[/quote]
No clue on latter and just will be a bit surprised if Cragg closes process right now to hire Cluess. Strictly my gut & obviously have been wrong before.
 
[quote="buckethead" post=340704]I still don't think he has the recruiting power and this only reinforces it. Aside from a 3* in 2011 and Norvel Pelle in 2012 he hasn't recruited over a 2*. His last recruit over a 2* was 7 years ago. Yes he is only at Iona. Yes he seems like he coach really well. If we gave him this years group to play over with again I believe that he would have gotten further. He doesn't have that option and although he is well known in NYC few people have kept the top NYC kids home to play at SJU. I see nothing that indicates TC is the guy to do this.[/quote]

Cmon this is silly. a 4* doesn't want to play for a mid major when bigger conference schools are calling. The only mid major coaches that become white hot commodities are guys who get lucky with one or two kids and make a little noise or manage to get their teams ranked or through the first weekend of the tourney.
 
[quote="Section9" post=340737][quote="SJU61982" post=340732][quote="Section9" post=340726][quote="Johnnie Drama" post=340712][quote="MainMan" post=340708][quote="SJU61982" post=340705]
Big guys? That's another story. That's where you may have a beef with Cluess's recruiting, but I'll stay open-minded, because he's proven everything else, IMO.[/quote]

Cluess' best players were arguably Mike Glover, who played like a beast down low, and 6'9 David Laury, who was the league MVP.[/quote]

You can throw in Jordan Washington as well.[/quote]

Yeah, they beat up on low mid major teams, how's that gonna fly in the BE? And I'm hot excusing Chris from his small ball either.[/quote]

These are exactly the same kind of questions Cluess faced when he went from high school ball to junior college.

He faced them again when he went from JC to college ball.

He faced them again when he went from D2 coaching, to D1 coaching.

The only constant in this, is that he has proven the so-called "experts" wrong every time. Maybe he won't this time, but IMO, the odds are overwhelmingly in his favor.[/quote]

All the steps you describe are baby steps compared to jumping to top D. 1 competition. I have absolutely no confidence that he pull it off at SJU.[/quote]

OK, what realistic candidate do you have more confidence in? And don't say "anybody", that's not an answer.

I can't believe that this many intelligent people, both fans and media, are so against his hiring. You can never be 100% sure of anybody, but he check all the marks for me.

Did you object to Fran's hiring? He came from the MAAC. Yes, he was unstable, but he had the program on the right track.

Would you have objected to us hiring Cooley, or Willard, at the times Providence and Seton Hall took them? Willard to the Hall surprised me at the time, I will admit, but it's worked out for them.

The MAAC is not a death knell for coaches moving to the big time. Quite a few of them have actually been very successful, and Cluess's resume is better then any of the three I just mentioned, at the time of the hiring (well, Fran won an NCAA game, so maybe not him, but definitely better then the other two).
 
[quote="Paultzman" post=340753][quote="MCNPA" post=340743][quote="Paultzman" post=340717]Is this the “lock” many have stated? My gut says there is more to the process.[/quote]

This mean we have another actual candidate, or we just can’t get things done with Cluess?[/quote]
No clue on latter and just will be a bit surprised if Cragg closes process right now to hire Cluess. Strictly my gut & obviously have been wrong before.[/quote]

Agree. I think he would have closed on Hurley if he could. But I would say likely Cluess is in the mix and if he interviewed well will be seriously considered. But we aren't done yet IMO
 
[quote="Paultzman" post=340753][quote="MCNPA" post=340743][quote="Paultzman" post=340717]Is this the “lock” many have stated? My gut says there is more to the process.[/quote]

This mean we have another actual candidate, or we just can’t get things done with Cluess?[/quote]
No clue on latter and just will be a bit surprised if Cragg closes process right now to hire Cluess. Strictly my gut & obviously have been wrong before.[/quote]

He would have if the buyout wasn’t two mill.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top