Cluess

[quote="Marillac" post=341364][quote="SJUFAN2" post=341351][quote="L J S A" post=341328]
It's silly that we can't, but I believe the bulk of the blame lies elsewhere.[/quote]

From a conduct standpoint, there's a difference between being critical of someone, and of being insulting, juvenile and repetitive in that criticism.

Most understand that. Some apparently do not.

If someone isn't getting PM's from mods about it, then they can probably guess which category they fall into on this subject.[/quote]

Yeah because the 2-3 mods that feel the need to interfere are renowned for their equal treatment.

Mullin can have his character questioned daily but no jokes about Hurley kicking Cragg in the nuts — an act that everyone knows didn’t literally happen is just too much. But feel free to call Mullin lazy and say that he stole money from St. John’s without a thought of trying to make us better the same day his brother is buried. That’s totally cool.

I take it back, OhioFan. Cragg has handled everything perfectly. We are so lucky he is captaining this ship.[/quote]

I wasn't going to respond to this because I really don't want to get into a 'back and forth' with you over behavior (yours, others, or my fellow mods), but there are a few things that need to be said here for the benefit of EVERYONE who chooses to post on REDMEN.com.

The folks who choose to moderate this forum do so, and have done so for DECADES, because they love this program and love having a place to come and share thoughts, rumors and connect with people who share the same passion. That's why we all VOLUNTEER to help Paul try to keep things on the rails around here. There are maybe 8 of us that still do this so that Paul isn't overwhelmed to the point he is forced to close the site down.

As Mods, we all have different life experiences. We are all different ages and we all like/dislike different posters on this site. We disagree on a ton of stuff, but one thing we all agree on (besides our passion for this program and our friendship with this sites owner) is our support of our fellow moderators. Nobody is always right, we rarely all agree on the same thing, and we all say and do things in the heat of the moment. However, make no mistake. We all have each others back because we respect the effort we've all put into making this a place for fans to congregate over the years.

When someone like you calls out one moderator, or takes a private conversation with one public in order to smear them, you are calling out and/or smearing ALL of us. How do you think that is perceived on our end? What do you think the result of consistent behavior like that is going to be?

Every poster on this site needs to realize the following and come to grips with it:

Posting here is a privilege, not a right.

You (and I) are guests in this house, and should act accordingly. I wouldn't walk into a gathering at your house and start talking shit about you, your friends, and your family to your guests. Why would you feel the need to do that in my friends 'house'? What kind of a person thinks its OK to do that? What kind of a person thinks they are the aggrieved party when they are politely asked to stop taking a 'piss in the punch bowl' as it were because the host wants everyone to have a good time?

We get that this is an emotional time for us fans. We want to give people freedom to vent a bit and express their opinions and emotions, but make NO mistake...if people can't be respectful and act like an adult then quite frankly, we don't need them here.

So a few words of advice to all who like to be part of this community..."Don't start nothin, won't be nothin."

That said...I have a question (and a suggestion) for you Marillac. I don't want a reply. My question is purely for reflective purposes, but I understand that you will need to have the last word so do what you have to do...

Why do you post here?

You start more crap with other posters and mods than just about anyone on the site. You go to other site(s) to whine about how poorly you are mistreated here and how bad "the mods" are to you and how much the site sucks. What's the point?

Now my suggestion...when you get demoted...and you will eventually...take it as a learning experience and a chance to change your behavior. When you get reinstated, do us all a favor and stay away from the punch bowl.
 
IMO Mullin has been treated more than fairly in the past four years. If all posters wrote down what Muliin would have to accomplish in his first four years to earn an extension he would fail in overall record, big east record , big east tournament record and post season bids and wins.
I feel his failures are worse than just what the record shows because it seemed obvious a couple of big men could have made a big difference and a local high school recruiter has been missing for three years.
I can understand Mullin's dislike of recruiting but how could he go so long without an ass't for that assignment.
If Cluess or whoever comes in and produces like Mullin did he will be gone after three years if he is lucky.
 
In my opinion Cragg hasn’t been here long enough to be saddled with any of the responsibility regarding the shortcomings of this program. For me, Cragg’s responsibility and accountability starts with this hire. Then we go from there.
 
[quote="Adam" post=341385][quote="Marillac" post=341380][quote="Adam" post=341367]Or maybe if Mullin didn't demand a full buyout we could've afforded Hurley. Hurley is not on Cragg. If the money isn't there then it's not there.[/quote]

Buck stops with Mullin was the battle cry for any shortcoming of the team. The buck doesn’t stop with Cragg for any shortcoming of the athletic department. In Cragg we trust. I see the light.[/quote]

Just stating facts, that $4+ million "buyout" makes things much tougher.[/quote]

Hurley’s entire contract is public record. Cragg had access to all information prior to setting these events in motion.
 
[quote="L J S A" post=341328][quote="Marillac" post=341322]Mullin has been attacked on this forum relentlessly for two years but I’ve been told by OhioFan we cannot be critical of Cragg and that it’s “not up for debate.”[/quote]

It's silly that we can't, but I believe the bulk of the blame lies elsewhere.[/quote]

Just noticed your Avatar. One of my childhood idols from the first time I saw him on the big screen. A man amongst boys.
 
Putting aside buyout money, what was Hurley gonna cost us, 3Mil? And what’s Cluess gonna cost, 1 Mil? To me as a long time business owner, there is no way in hell that Hurley is worth 3X the amount of money that Cluess is.
 
[quote="Monte" post=341425]Putting aside buyout money, what was Hurley gonna cost us, 3Mil? And what’s Cluess gonna cost, 1 Mil? To me as a long time business owner, there is no way in hell that Hurley is worth 3X the amount of money that Cluess is.[/quote]

Of course you would have to look at the whole picture. If you think Bobby would get us there faster and did well that would mean more money for the school and the extras $2 mil would’ve been a wised investment. As a business owner I think you would look at the potential of the investment you are making.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Mike" post=341428][quote="Monte" post=341425]Putting aside buyout money, what was Hurley gonna cost us, 3Mil? And what’s Cluess gonna cost, 1 Mil? To me as a long time business owner, there is no way in hell that Hurley is worth 3X the amount of money that Cluess is.[/quote]

Of course you would have to look at the whole picture. If you think Bobby would get us there faster and did well that would mean more money for the school and the extras $2 mil would’ve been a wised investment. As a business owner I think you would know if you are making an investment you look at the potential.[/quote]

Agree Mike, not sue if Hurley is worth $3MM, feel he is overvalued, but time will tell. He is making a lot without winning anything, granted a small sample size.
 
[quote="shamsman2" post=341432][quote="Mike" post=341428][quote="Monte" post=341425]Putting aside buyout money, what was Hurley gonna cost us, 3Mil? And what’s Cluess gonna cost, 1 Mil? To me as a long time business owner, there is no way in hell that Hurley is worth 3X the amount of money that Cluess is.[/quote]

Of course you would have to look at the whole picture. If you think Bobby would get us there faster and did well that would mean more money for the school and the extras $2 mil would’ve been a wised investment. As a business owner I think you would know if you are making an investment you look at the potential.[/quote]

Agree Mike, not sue if Hurley is worth $3MM, feel he is overvalued, but time will tell. He is making a lot without winning anything, granted a small sample size.[/quote]

I guess it doesn’t matter since he won’t be coming.
 
[quote="Mike" post=341428][quote="Monte" post=341425]Putting aside buyout money, what was Hurley gonna cost us, 3Mil? And what’s Cluess gonna cost, 1 Mil? To me as a long time business owner, there is no way in hell that Hurley is worth 3X the amount of money that Cluess is.[/quote]

Of course you would have to look at the whole picture. If you think Bobby would get us there faster and did well that would mean more money for the school and the extras $2 mil would’ve been a wised investment. As a business owner I think you would look at the potential of the investment you are making.[/quote]

I’m saying I dont see Cluess being much more of a risk than Hurley, so why would I pay 3X the amount of money on someone who I don’t feel relatively certain is going to give me 3X the value? Pitino I would understand paying 3X, but not Hurley. I bring this up only because some posters feel that we should overpay just to get someone here who they feel is a slightly better choice.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Monte" post=341422]

Just noticed your Avatar. One of my childhood idols from the first time I saw him on the big screen. A man amongst boys.[/quote]

I tried to find a pic of what i thought Cluess looked like in the '70s.:lol:
 
To add to the financial situation, Mullin went on the record in his statement saying he stepped down. Even though word is he is/was expecting to be paid his salary in full, it's likely not that simple. They could settle on a figure well under $4M. The remaining funds could also be deferred over a period of time (or perhaps that's the Mets fan in me). But without a seat at the table, we can't just assume SJU is on the hook for $2M each of the next two years.
 
As others have noted there are scenarios, after a comprehensive process, where Cluess is a reasonable hire.

One thing that would concern me however is something MJDinkins mentioned last week - seems like a Cluess hire / success would almost be viewed as contingent upon him hiring a bigtime staff.

Look we just learned the hard way how important that is. For any coach, even established great ones, let alone one who had never coached before in Mullin or someone making the jump from the MAAC to the Big East like Cluess.

But it would be nice for a change with an SJU hire if a bigtime staff didn't seem so much like a contingency for the head coach, because the head coach was enough in his own right.

With Lavin it was - great recruiter, needed a bench coach (true). With Mullin it was - great for program profile and revenue in GM type capacity, needs bench coach and recruiters (true). Now with Cluess it seems like - hoops junkie who can really coach the game, knows how to build winning culture, and is respected locally, but needs staff who can recruit at this level particularly on national stage (my guess is also true).

Again nothing wrong with hiring a staff to supplement areas that aren't a strength - that's what you would expect logically, and frankly doing so consistently would be an improvement over the prior two coaches who for whatever reason wouldn't commit to doing so year over year.

But to use two examples of guys I would take here in an instant, they clearly have great/good staffs, but I don't look at Dan Hurley or Ed Cooley and say "they need X on staff to make it work". Because they are wall to wall coaches, recruiters, program runners, fundraisers, and everything else involved in their own right. Having a dyanamic and complete staff is just another supplement, not a necessity.

Not a prerequisite to winning, but would be a concern for me to go this route a third consecutive time.
 
Last edited:
1) What are the odds of any high school coach developing a traditionally crappy program (St. Mary's) into a nationally ranked program that at one point was ranked best in the nation? Answer: Given there are about 36,000 high schools and secondary schools in the US, probably at least 25,000 to one.

2) What are the odds of a high school coach who had never coached in college before taking a D2 job and immediately establishing a premier D2 program, winning 80% of his games overall in 5 seasons (120-33). Given there are 300 D2 schools, and this kind of success immediately is almost unprecedented, I'd put those odds at maybe 10,000 to one

3) What are the odds that a successful D2 coach can walk into a D1 program that is in the dumper, and in nine seasons, win the automatic bid 6 times, and for good measure the regular season title 4 additional times? You guess that one.

Now imagine if that guy was now say 40? How many big conference schools would be jumping all over that guy if he would go anywhere to build on his record of success? My guess is a couple dozen.

How many guys have ever had this type of overall success at every single stop in their career, winning almost immediately no matter what he was handed? Almost no one.

Well we could spend a few million on a guy who in the ACC in 6 seasons, finished 10th, 12th, and 14th in 3 of them, went 3-15 this season and 8-10 last season in conference. To me, that's a guy you contemplate firing, not hiring.
 
[quote="Beast of the East" post=341676]1) What are the odds of any high school coach developing a traditionally crappy program (St. Mary's) into a nationally ranked program that at one point was ranked best in the nation? Answer: Given there are about 36,000 high schools and secondary schools in the US, probably at least 25,000 to one.

2) What are the odds of a high school coach who had never coached in college before taking a D2 job and immediately establishing a premier D2 program, winning 80% of his games overall in 5 seasons (120-33). Given there are 300 D2 schools, and this kind of success immediately is almost unprecedented, I'd put those odds at maybe 10,000 to one

3) What are the odds that a successful D2 coach can walk into a D1 program that is in the dumper, and in nine seasons, win the automatic bid 6 times, and for good measure the regular season title 4 additional times? You guess that one.

Now imagine if that guy was now say 40? How many big conference schools would be jumping all over that guy if he would go anywhere to build on his record of success? My guess is a couple dozen.

How many guys have ever had this type of overall success at every single stop in their career, winning almost immediately no matter what he was handed? Almost no one.

Well we could spend a few million on a guy who in the ACC in 6 seasons, finished 10th, 12th, and 14th in 3 of them, went 3-15 this season and 8-10 last season in conference. To me, that's a guy you contemplate firing, not hiring.[/quote]

Cluess does seem the safe, logical pick to replace a SJU legend. Will Cragg take that route or opt for someone with either more risk or does he have somebody in mind with great track record in high D1 program if that is realistic.? (Doubt latter myself)

Suspect only Cragg knows. He seems the type to tune out the noise, avoid social media distractions and focus. This week may prove interesting. His stakes are high. If his recommended candidate is accepted and fails, I could see a short stay for him here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote="SJU1512" post=341668]As others have noted there are scenarios, after a comprehensive process, where Cluess is a reasonable hire.

One thing that would concern me however is something MJDinkins mentioned last week - seems like a Cluess hire / success would almost be viewed as contingent upon him hiring a bigtime staff.

Look we just learned the hard way how important that is. For any coach, even established great ones, let alone one who had never coached before in Mullin or someone making the jump from the MAAC to the Big East like Cluess.

But it would be nice for a change with an SJU hire if a bigtime staff didn't seem so much like a contingency for the head coach, because the head coach was enough in his own right.

With Lavin it was - great recruiter, needed a bench coach (true). With Mullin it was - great for program profile and revenue in GM type capacity, needs bench coach and recruiters (true). Now with Cluess it seems like - hoops junkie who can really coach the game, knows how to build winning culture, and is respected locally, but needs staff who can recruit at this level particularly on national stage (my guess is also true).

Again nothing wrong with hiring a staff to supplement areas that aren't a strength - that's what you would expect logically, and frankly doing so consistently would be an improvement over the prior two coaches who for whatever reason wouldn't commit to doing so year over year.

But to use two examples of guys I would take here in an instant, they clearly have great/good staffs, but I don't look at Dan Hurley or Ed Cooley and say "they need X on staff to make it work". Because they are wall to wall coaches, recruiters, program runners, fundraisers, and everything else involved in their own right. Having a dyanamic and complete staff is just another supplement, not a necessity.

Not a prerequisite to winning, but would be a concern for me to go this route a third consecutive time.[/quote]

Fair points, but how many head coaches out there fall into the category of being great without a great staff? 10?
How many of them would want this job at 2-3m a year? Zero?

Any coach we hire is going to have to have a great staff with skill sets that accentuate his own. Mullin isn't here because he didn't get that. Lavin is gone because he lost sight of that as well.

I don't know Cluess, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I see a coach who is:

1- A winner at every level he's coached
2- Experienced at building and running a clean program
3- Someone who recruits ABOVE his programs level.
4- A guy who is deeply connected to, and respected by local HS and AAU programs.
5- A guy who WANTS this job and isn't going to use it as a stepping stone to a bigger payday.
6- A guy who works his ass off to be successful
7- A guy who doesn't need a bench coach to help him with X's and O's or game management.
8- A guy who plays a style that is attractive to this generation of players.

Cluess isn't my top choice this time around, but I'd be happy to have him. To me, he'd be to St Johns what Ed Cooley is to Providence. We'd be top half of the league just about every year and we'd make some noise in our own tournament every March.

I'm not sure we can ask for, or expect, more than that considering the last 20 years this program has had.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Paultzman" post=341679][quote="Beast of the East" post=341676]1) What are the odds of any high school coach developing a traditionally crappy program (St. Mary's) into a nationally ranked program that at one point was ranked best in the nation? Answer: Given there are about 36,000 high schools and secondary schools in the US, probably at least 25,000 to one.

2) What are the odds of a high school coach who had never coached in college before taking a D2 job and immediately establishing a premier D2 program, winning 80% of his games overall in 5 seasons (120-33). Given there are 300 D2 schools, and this kind of success immediately is almost unprecedented, I'd put those odds at maybe 10,000 to one

3) What are the odds that a successful D2 coach can walk into a D1 program that is in the dumper, and in nine seasons, win the automatic bid 6 times, and for good measure the regular season title 4 additional times? You guess that one.

Now imagine if that guy was now say 40? How many big conference schools would be jumping all over that guy if he would go anywhere to build on his record of success? My guess is a couple dozen.

How many guys have ever had this type of overall success at every single stop in their career, winning almost immediately no matter what he was handed? Almost no one.

Well we could spend a few million on a guy who in the ACC in 6 seasons, finished 10th, 12th, and 14th in 3 of them, went 3-15 this season and 8-10 last season in conference. To me, that's a guy you contemplate firing, not hiring.[/quote]

Cluess does seem the safe, logical pick to replace a SJU legend. Will Cragg take that route or opt for someone with either more risk or does he have somebody in mind with great track record in high D1 program if that is realistic.? (Doubt latter myself)

Suspect only Cragg knows. He seems the type to tune out the noise, avoid social media distractions and focus. This week may prove interesting. His stakes are high. If his recommended candidate is accepted and fails, I could see a short stay for him here.[/quote]

Agree on all fronts. I also agree that admin must exercise trust in his capacity to lead, and will not provide suffocating oversight that steps over him to make this decision (no Harrington-ROberts hires here).

I also suggest that Cragg is not a leaker, nor are his closest confidantes participating in the process. People may see who shows up on campus for interviews, but I don't think information on conversations or strategy is being leaked by those in control. Wouldn't be shocked if the Mullin camp is doing some damage control, so I wouldn't get bent out of shape on what we owe or don't owe. We aren't that stupid any more, are we? :)

First big hire for Cragg? I'd say he bangs one off the wall in the gap for a double (Cluess). Swinging for the fences and striking out makes him look a lot worse, and there are worse things than exercising margins of safety.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Paultzman" post=341679][quote="Beast of the East" post=341676]1) What are the odds of any high school coach developing a traditionally crappy program (St. Mary's) into a nationally ranked program that at one point was ranked best in the nation? Answer: Given there are about 36,000 high schools and secondary schools in the US, probably at least 25,000 to one.

2) What are the odds of a high school coach who had never coached in college before taking a D2 job and immediately establishing a premier D2 program, winning 80% of his games overall in 5 seasons (120-33). Given there are 300 D2 schools, and this kind of success immediately is almost unprecedented, I'd put those odds at maybe 10,000 to one

3) What are the odds that a successful D2 coach can walk into a D1 program that is in the dumper, and in nine seasons, win the automatic bid 6 times, and for good measure the regular season title 4 additional times? You guess that one.

Now imagine if that guy was now say 40? How many big conference schools would be jumping all over that guy if he would go anywhere to build on his record of success? My guess is a couple dozen.

How many guys have ever had this type of overall success at every single stop in their career, winning almost immediately no matter what he was handed? Almost no one.

Well we could spend a few million on a guy who in the ACC in 6 seasons, finished 10th, 12th, and 14th in 3 of them, went 3-15 this season and 8-10 last season in conference. To me, that's a guy you contemplate firing, not hiring.[/quote]

Cluess does seem the safe, logical pick to replace a SJU legend. Will Cragg take that route or opt for someone with either more risk or does he have somebody in mind with great track record in high D1 program if that is realistic.? (Doubt latter myself)

Suspect only Cragg knows. He seems the type to tune out the noise, avoid social media distractions and focus. This week may prove interesting. His stakes are high. If his recommended candidate is accepted and fails, I could see a short stay for him here.[/quote]
You may be right Paultzman but most ADs get a second chance at a big coaching hire not one before they are asked to walk the plank (that one's for you Chicago Days:)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top