None of you have any idea what Richmond brings or doesn't bring to the table... similar to Mullin, frankly. We just don't know.
LoVett is a far better outside shooter than probably anyone could have anticipated. Why couldn't that be all because of work that Richmond did with him? It's impossible to know.
Frankly, I like the pitch to recruits about having two awesome offensive hall of famers on the bench. It must make it much easier in recruiting kids out of highschool. I much prefer to wait to judge the coaches until the end of next season.
Some of your are just so short-sighted sometimes. Let the recruiting develop. Let the talent develop. (I personally don't think Yakwe and Sima will get to meet the high expectations many had because they are so late to learning the game).
The coaches might be disasters, or might be great. We won't know for another two seasons. Give it time.
You make a good point. But teaching shooting is Mullins strength. I am suggesting having a coaching staff w different skill sets may have been a better approach.I also agree w you that it is too early in the season to judge.
Certainly Richmond and Mullin bring HOF cache to recruiting and that can't hurt. That doesn't mean either of them are great salesmen, which is what recruiting is all about. What kids want to know when they are recruited is how that staff and school are going to get them to the NBA. Neither Mullin nor Richmond has gotten anyone to the NBA (yet) so their HOF resumes can easily be counteracted by a D1 coach who has 5 or 6 guys in the NBA over a dozen years. More than anything, the recruiting end of things involve sales ability, and as we know, there are AAU coaches with their hands out wondering what's in it for them for delivering a kid. It's a seedy business that the Calipariis of the world are great at.
To speculate that Richmond and Mullin may be great teachers is fine, but there really isn't a lot of evidence that suggests that in sports the best players are the best teachers. There is a traditional path in readying yourself to coach at the high D1 level which includes head coaching at lower levels (D3, D2) then a mid major. Even with phenomenal HS coaching success, Cluess followed this formula and proved himself every step of the way, justifying the current bump to Iona. Mullin and Richmond are a huge risk because they never coached anywhere. You can speculate all you want about player development or translating their NBA experience into winning in-game strategy but until there is real evidence of that, it's just wishful thinking on your part.
To be clear, this IS a wait and see thing, but unless they field a very strong roster next season, the odds of this not being a successful try on the part of SJU will continue to increase. Don't get me wrong - this hire was clearly a case of risk-reward, clouded by the huge aura Mullin left on us after 4 great seasons as a player. The entire narrative of your greatest basketball legend coming home to NY and to campus to resurrect the once highly regarded program is so intoxicating, so story-book in its making that it is hard for any SJU fan (myself included) to resist taking a shot at. That is especially true since the past 25 years have not yielded a single coaching candidate that had all the attributes to build and sustain a winning tradition - 5 coaches, not a single defection - all fired. So, SJU gave in to the obvious temptation - hire a guy who IS SJU, who represents athletic success better than anyone who ever played a sport here (and that's a pretty high honor considering guys like Artest, Viola, Franco, and many others).
When you lose 4 in a row of your first real tests, it's easy to either blame the coaches in part for the caliber of play or absolve the coaches by pointing to the lack of talent or inexperience. Somewhere in that analysis is the truth - that we are either too short on talent, high on inexperience, or there are coaching deficiencies - maybe all of the them. But it's just plain silly to try to shut down that analysis or dialogue by adopting a wait and see approach. Either the signs of improvement are there, or there are signs of things not going to well. We are here to discuss these things, and to try to take a "glass half full" approach to prove you are on a higher ground than other fans is just ridiculous.
For the record, I sat in the 6th row behind the SJU bench for all 4 Mullin years for every single home game and many away games, and I don't remember Mullin being "chirpy" or anything like his bench personna in challenging refs. Curious if anyone else remembers Mullin constantly lambasting refs as a player.
