New York is the media capital of the universe. If SJU makes it to the Final Four, little old ladies at the beauty salon in Peoria will know about it. Mullin understands that very well, having lived it. But it's been so long since we've enjoyed that status that it's a tough sell for the guy who can make $2 million coaching in a smaller town where the cost of living is nothing compared to NYC.
Fire Mullin!
- Thread starter ManhattAn1
- Start date
If you truly believe we can never be relevant again, why even continue to be a fan of the program? As much as I love my school, if I felt as though they did not have a commitment to having a winning program, I would find myriad other ways to spend my time and money.
we are sju
Active member
What is relevant?
Lavin wasn't perfect but he basically delivered what you are asking for. Otherwise you have to go back to the Louie days of which I referenced. You are all over the place. You are calling yourself an optimist, yet you want to have Mullin fired I guess or what exactly do you want?
My point is we have never been Duke or UNC. I was very happy during Louie years though I always thought we should have been better. The fact is under Lavin we were not that far off from what we were during our "glory years". Since we decided to get rid of him and bring back the face of our "glory years", I am prepared to give him at least as much time as we gave a total nincompoop in Norm. Seems only fair, no?
I want Mullin to win here because it's Mullin. This is our DiMaggio (or Jeter) or Namath. As a matter of fact, those guys have nothing on him because Chris comes from this city.
If we win 5 this year the only option is to insert a coaching chip into his head and we'll be on our way.
If we win 5 this year the only option is to insert a coaching chip into his head and we'll be on our way.
"Relevant" is subjective. To me "relevant" and "consistently good" is making the big dance the large majority of the years(IE 4 out of 5). And that's exactly what we did from mid 70's through the early 2000's, except for the few BM years. That's not a very high bar IMO. Any decent coach will be able to do that. Lavin would have done that if A) he established local ties, and B ) he didn't stop working. We would have never been a consistently good under Lavin mostly because of those two things. Chris is working, and he deserves the benefit of the doubt for the time being. However if he does not work out, it's not the end of the world IMO. There's always going to be a good coach out there for the hiring. And if CM doesn't work out, hopefully the next hire will be the right one.
we are sju
Active member
Again Lavin was not far off what you are asking. Personally unless we were going for a clear upgrade, I would have kept Lavin. I bought into the return of the king even though at first I was skeptical. It has not gone well to this point. No one can argue that but you can't keep rebuilding. Especially as you pointed out this has been about a 15 year rebuild. Since there is no clear evidence we will go get a slam dunk coach, I think Chris Mullin at least deserves the same time we gave all the non Chris Mullin coaches.
Agreed but with effort we'd see improved execution. My bigger point was not that 5 wins would be OK but losing because you are overmatched is one thing but losing because you didn't put in the effort is just not OK. Recruits can see that to a certain extent as can most coaches who could respect high effort, low talent teams. But would lose respect for a coach not get the most out of individual players quicker than for losses IMHO. A lack of effort at game time is just ungrateful and disrespectful. It is pathetic really. Disrespects everything including yourself. Fans, teammates, coaches, the guys that came before you. The guys who would have put in the hard work but didn't have the talent to get the opportunity you have. Hard to believe that anyone who would kill themselves in practice would be ambivalent during a game.
Class of 72
Active member
Good questions!
The biggest reason in the first 3 hires post Carnesecca was that the school was notorious for being frugal when it comes to paying staff. Mahoney, Fraschilla, Jarvis and Roberts were all hired on the cheap. Mahoney never deserved " a chance" as some have opinioned. His chance came at his alma mater where he could have earned consideration but he was an abject failure there and was fired.
The second reason you yourself answered. Fraschilla and Jarvis were, based on success and experience, good hires.
Both did not see St. John's as their final destination and their selfish antics cost them their jobs.
The Norm Roberts hire was just plain shortsighted stupidity by a morally corrupt president who fired Jarvis a few games into a season. We have not recovered since although Father Harry got some nice suits and trips courtesy of his Chinese sponsors.
As far as not seeing the school as attractive for talented coaches you are partially correct. This Vincention school has been notorious for firing and ending the careers of previous coaches. None of our previous coaches were hired away from better programs so we are likely perceived as a program that hires coaches bound to fail. In the earlier days it was also the crap facilities and complete lack of a college atmosphere. Lavin, yes Fun, Lavin, changed that perception because he was the first National Brand coach interested in the job. We became NYC back page news again. Everyone knows the rest.
Mullin was also a big news hire but was a complete mystery starting out tabula rasa. Both the coaching and assembling of the working parts of the team however have been haphazard. Matt Master Recruiter is not bringing Mullin complimentary pieces to work with. There is not one Big East worthy "physical " player on the entire roster. If he is doing the recruiting he is a big part of the problem.
As far as being attractive as a "location" New York City is the capital of the world....period. You need to focus on coaches that seek that limelight and who are eager to sell it to recruits. I've been to over a hundred college campuses and more college towns that I can remember. Some coaches like those small college town experiences. We don't want those guys. Anyone who's been to Storrs, Syracuse, Spokane, Philadelphia, Columbia, Cincinnati, Memphis, College Park, and Moraga will tell you it wasn't the location that attracted recruits although I love Moraga.
It is a reputation of success. The success that does not have to go back to the years before the Internet.
John Calipari made Amherst and Memphis destinations. Mark Few made Spokane a destination. Randy Bennett made little Moraga and St. Mary's a destination, especially for "Aussies".
We have the destination. We have the academics to attract the non Rhodes scholars of high school basketball. What we have had the most of however is the blind leading the blind.
In the end austour, yes, it has been the school's shortsightedness and frugality that have positioned it where it belongs now at the bottom. That has fostered an atmosphere of failure that keeps repeating itself. Without sustainable success nothing will ever change. We follow the program as alums but no one in New York City gives a crap anymore.
THIS, but I'd add smart basketball. Don't have to be highly skilled or athletic to play smart basketball and hustle. That should be the floor for any program at any time. Then, talent, skill and athleticism moves the bar up from there.
beast of the east
Active member
Good questions!
The biggest reason in the first 3 hires post Carnesecca was that the school was notorious for being frugal when it comes to paying staff. Mahoney, Fraschilla, Jarvis and Roberts were all hired on the cheap. Mahoney never deserved " a chance" as some have opinioned. His chance came at his alma mater where he could have earned consideration but he was an abject failure there and was fired.
The second reason you yourself answered. Fraschilla and Jarvis were, based on success and experience, good hires.
Both did not see St. John's as their final destination and their selfish antics cost them their jobs.
The Norm Roberts hire was just plain shortsighted stupidity by a morally corrupt president who fired Jarvis a few games into a season. We have not recovered since although Father Harry got some nice suits and trips courtesy of his Chinese sponsors.
As far as not seeing the school as attractive for talented coaches you are partially correct. This Vincention school has been notorious for firing and ending the careers of previous coaches. None of our previous coaches were hired away from better programs so we are likely perceived as a program that hires coaches bound to fail. In the earlier days it was also the crap facilities and complete lack of a college atmosphere. Lavin, yes Fun, Lavin, changed that perception because he was the first National Brand coach interested in the job. We became acknowledge back page news again. Everyone knows the rest.
Mullin was also a big news hire but was a complete mystery starting out tabula rasa. Both the coaching and assembling of the working parts of the team however have been haphazard. Matt Master Recruiter is not bringing Mullin complimentary pieces to work with. There is not one Big East worthy "physical " player on the entire roster. If he is doing the recruiting he is a big part of the problem.
As far as being attractive as a "location" New York City is the capital of the world....period. You need to focus on coaches that seek that limelight and who are eager to sell it to recruits. I've been to over a hundred college campuses and more college towns that I can remember. Some coaches like those small college town experiences. We don't want those guys. Anyone who's been to Storrs, Syracuse, Spokane, Philadelphia, Columbia, Cincinnati, Memphis, College Park, and Moraga will tell you it wasn't the location that attracted recruits although I love Moraga.
It is a reputation of success. The success that does not have to go back to the years before the Internet.
John Calipari made Amherst and Memphis destinations. Mark Few made Spokane a destination. Randy Bennett made little Moraga and St. Mary's a destination, especially for "Aussies".
We have the destination. We have the academics to attract the non Rhodes scholars of high school basketball. What we have had the most of however is the blind leading the blind.
In the end austour, yes, it has been the school's shortsightedness and frugality that have positioned it where it belongs now at the bottom. That has fostered an atmosphere of failure that keeps repeating itself. Without sustainable success nothing will ever change. We follow the program as alums but no one in New York City gives a crap anymore.
Actually I think Manetta went into the hole for Jarvis, creatively wrapping around an apparel and sneaker deal, radio show, and SJU salary package of around 800K - twice what Fran was making. After the Jarvis meltdown, they got NR for a bargain basement you get what you pay for of somewhere between 400-600K for NR.
For Lavin, they splurged about $2 million, and would have kept him, except that for $2 million they got a $1 million coach.
we are sju
Active member
I was just thinking that this team reminds me more of the last 2 Mahoney teams as opposed to say the Norm Roberts stinkers. You knew going in Norm's teams were outmatched but they played hard. Mahoney teams had talent but looked disorganized and the team did not mesh well and was not put together well. This is how this team looks. I think because both the Mahoney teams and this team have talent yet are losing, you see more frustration than you saw with Norm's teams who I think expected to lose.
This kind of talk that Coaches at the level of Lavin, actually have this kind of impact despite who is on the floor is not reality. Lavin dug himself a massive hole going back years of recruiting. Instead of keeping him, he should have been fired a year earlier when it was clear that the only recruit we had lined up was Isaiah Briscoe and that he was betting the farm on that one recruit through two full recruiting cycles. He was most likely thrilled to get an exit that left him some dignity. Had Sampson actually come, our W/L still would likely have been not much better last season under Lavin and I seriously doubt Clark or Simon would have wanted to play for him.
I agree unfortunately. Mahoney's first season (courtesy of David Cain) was extraordinarily fun to be a fan but after that it was all pain. No kidding, when I watched the last game I was thinking about Mahoney's players eating McDonald's during practice. I hope that isn't the case but the popcorn incident had me going there too.
we are sju
Active member
Possibly but maybe Obekpa and Jordan stay?
Yes if we would have kept Lavin it probably would have ended badly. Or maybe if we gave him a new contract he would have had a fire lit. Just based off of his record here he probably deserved an extension. I do not disagree with you on how it probably would have went though.
If I've learned anything in my year's in business, it's that you don't offer an employee who is not working anywhere near full capacity, more money(or a contract extension) in the hopes of motivating him/her. IMO more money or an extension would have just served to make Lav lazier than he already was.
The difference is that once Cain left, BM did not have a legit PG. We do. Which is why the disorganization on the court is even more perplexing and disappointing. Norm also never had a legit PG. I had really hoped that Lovett would have been more of a floor general. We've seen glimpses of it, and he had been hurt, but we need to see more of it.