Mike Anderson - Recruiting, Coaching, Etc.

Unbelievable that after just his first year as head coach and having a winning record while likely on his way to an NIT bid, there are fans who are already disillusioned that we haven't signed certain recruiting targets that the previous staff spent little or time recruiting. Let's give this coach time to get established and identified with the new St. John's brand because the last labels left by previous administrations were not very marketable.
If he wins this coming season I think he will have long term success in the recruiting game.
 
[quote="Class of 72" post=396221]Unbelievable that after just his first year as head coach and having a winning record while likely on his way to an NIT bid, there are fans who are already disillusioned that we haven't signed certain recruiting targets that the previous staff spent little or time recruiting. Let's give this coach time to get established and identified with the new St. John's brand because the last labels left by previous administrations were not very marketable.
If he wins this coming season I think he will have long term success in the recruiting game.[/quote]

I believe without question the most qualified coach we've had since Carnesecca. He checks way more boxes than anyone else.
 
[quote="panther2" post=396210]Mike, Pharm, Boo,

Please take the time to read and think about this before you respond.

What I understand people saying is that the redundancy of your posts is ridiculous.

For example. if over the next 10 days, every Big East school signed a 4* recruit but St. Johns, you all would spend the next 10 days repeating on every thread that our staff is lacking in recruiting. This becomes repetitive and annoying to a lot of us. What can you really state different on the 10th day that you haven't already stated on the first 9.

This is August and we have 1 commitment. If by June 2021, our class is looking bad, I could understand and accept your criticisms. However, to me, what you all do is unhealthy for everyone involved.

As someone posted earlier, it is ok to agree to disagree. I learned this lesson during the "political" discussions we previously had. I have eaten and hung out with some posters whose political views do not align with mine. While I don't agree with them, as a man I have to accept that while we have St. Johns and basketball in common, how, when, and where we were raised, gives each of us our own perspective on life.[/quote]

Panther I have nothing but respect for you and I feel the same sentiments about you and all of the other SJU fans on the board as you expressed in that last paragraph.

That being said go back and actually read my posts and don’t just group me Boo and Zaun together. We have similar views no doubt, but I’ve been more than willing to give CMA a shot and was highly optimistic about Jordan Riley and Applewhite.

I’ll admit I have been very negative since losing out on Riley, and especially now with Applewhite seemingly out of the picture, and I don’t think we get Cuffe either. But know that I want nothing more than for this coach and team to succeed going forward and will gladly be back on CMA’s side once he proves me wrong. Until then I’ll try to refrain from being so negative since it’s bothering so many people.
 
[quote="PharmDJohnnie11" post=396236][quote="panther2" post=396210]Mike, Pharm, Boo,

Please take the time to read and think about this before you respond.

What I understand people saying is that the redundancy of your posts is ridiculous.

For example. if over the next 10 days, every Big East school signed a 4* recruit but St. Johns, you all would spend the next 10 days repeating on every thread that our staff is lacking in recruiting. This becomes repetitive and annoying to a lot of us. What can you really state different on the 10th day that you haven't already stated on the first 9.

This is August and we have 1 commitment. If by June 2021, our class is looking bad, I could understand and accept your criticisms. However, to me, what you all do is unhealthy for everyone involved.

As someone posted earlier, it is ok to agree to disagree. I learned this lesson during the "political" discussions we previously had. I have eaten and hung out with some posters whose political views do not align with mine. While I don't agree with them, as a man I have to accept that while we have St. Johns and basketball in common, how, when, and where we were raised, gives each of us our own perspective on life.[/quote]

Panther I have nothing but respect for you and I feel the same sentiments about you and all of the other SJU fans on the board as you expressed in that last paragraph.

That being said go back and actually read my posts and don’t just group me Boo and Zaun together. We have similar views no doubt, but I’ve been more than willing to give CMA a shot and was highly optimistic about Jordan Riley and Applewhite.

I’ll admit I have been very negative since losing out on Riley, and especially now with Applewhite seemingly out of the picture, and I don’t think we get Cuffe either. But know that I want nothing more than for this coach and team to succeed going forward and will gladly be back on CMA’s side once he proves me wrong. Until then I’ll try to refrain from being so negative since it’s bothering so many people.[/quote]



Pharm, you are right, I should not have lumped everyone together. It just seemed as if you three aligned yourself. I won't do it again.

Not sure how old you are, but I have been a fan for over 60 years. Have sent many young men who played for me to St. Johns. At 72 years old, hope that I can see St Johns become relevant again. Hope that there is a season this year because I believe that Coach Anderson will be able to navigate the obstacles better than most.

In regards to Kyle Jr, have a little faith. I know it is hard but the current staff is putting in the work.
 
[quote="NCJohnnie" post=396163]Let's move on. Constructive criticism is fine and valued, constant negativity sucks. My 2 cents.[/quote]

A lot of the negative criticism is constructive. The problem is when posters don't seem to get that they are turning into trolls.
 
[quote="austour" post=396282][quote="NCJohnnie" post=396163]Let's move on. Constructive criticism is fine and valued, constant negativity sucks. My 2 cents.[/quote]

A lot of the negative criticism is constructive. The problem is when posters don't seem to get that they are turning into trolls.[/quote]

Meh. I don't think that the criticism I've read about the recruiting - during a pandemic - of a coach in his second year at a second- or third-tier program is constructive at all.

If the man clearly couldn't coach and his past track record was based purely on recruiting (in other words, if he was something very much like Steve Lavin), then I might see it the other way. Same might be true if this was year 3 or 4 and the team hadn't made the NCAA tournament.

You might even have me at "constructive" if it was year 4 or 5 and the team had gotten to a couple of NCAA tournaments and gotten knocked out because of a clear talent gap.

But right now? Without seeing one second of the multiple players that have been added to the program? Without playing so much as a scrimmage? Not constructive at all, IMHO. Just unconstructively negative.

To the extent that's because of the program history, I get it. I've been here longer than most, so I fully understand that it takes either a fair degree of intestinal fortitude or a masochistic streak to still be here. But then again, nobody is forcing anyone to be fan, either.
 
[quote="lawmanfan" post=396294][quote="austour" post=396282][quote="NCJohnnie" post=396163]Let's move on. Constructive criticism is fine and valued, constant negativity sucks. My 2 cents.[/quote]

A lot of the negative criticism is constructive. The problem is when posters don't seem to get that they are turning into trolls.[/quote]

Meh. I don't think that the criticism I've read about the recruiting - during a pandemic - of a coach in his second year at a second- or third-tier program is constructive at all.

If the man clearly couldn't coach and his past track record was based purely on recruiting (in other words, if he was something very much like Steve Lavin), then I might see it the other way. Same might be true if this was year 3 or 4 and the team hadn't made the NCAA tournament.

You might even have me at "constructive" if it was year 4 or 5 and the team had gotten to a couple of NCAA tournaments and gotten knocked out because of a clear talent gap.

But right now? Without seeing one second of the multiple players that have been added to the program? Without playing so much as a scrimmage? Not constructive at all, IMHO. Just unconstructively negative.

To the extent that's because of the program history, I get it. I've been here longer than most, so I fully understand that it takes either a fair degree of intestinal fortitude or a masochistic streak to still be here. But then again, nobody is forcing anyone to be fan, either.[/quote]

You do understand and others as well that Mike Anderson was fired from a second tier SEC program right? Simple reason was he wasn't winning enough.

I am not saying it makes him a bad coach or negates a pretty good coaching career or even means he won't get SJU going in a good direction.

But people seem to forget this salient fact when they recount his resume
 
[quote="fordham96" post=396297][quote="lawmanfan" post=396294][quote="austour" post=396282][quote="NCJohnnie" post=396163]Let's move on. Constructive criticism is fine and valued, constant negativity sucks. My 2 cents.[/quote]

A lot of the negative criticism is constructive. The problem is when posters don't seem to get that they are turning into trolls.[/quote]

Meh. I don't think that the criticism I've read about the recruiting - during a pandemic - of a coach in his second year at a second- or third-tier program is constructive at all.

If the man clearly couldn't coach and his past track record was based purely on recruiting (in other words, if he was something very much like Steve Lavin), then I might see it the other way. Same might be true if this was year 3 or 4 and the team hadn't made the NCAA tournament.

You might even have me at "constructive" if it was year 4 or 5 and the team had gotten to a couple of NCAA tournaments and gotten knocked out because of a clear talent gap.

But right now? Without seeing one second of the multiple players that have been added to the program? Without playing so much as a scrimmage? Not constructive at all, IMHO. Just unconstructively negative.

To the extent that's because of the program history, I get it. I've been here longer than most, so I fully understand that it takes either a fair degree of intestinal fortitude or a masochistic streak to still be here. But then again, nobody is forcing anyone to be fan, either.[/quote]

You do understand and others as well that Mike Anderson was fired from a second tier SEC program right? Simple reason was he wasn't winning enough.

I am not saying it makes him a bad coach or negates a pretty good coaching career or even means he won't get SJU going in a good direction.

But people seem to forget this salient fact when they recount his resume[/quote]

I may be wrong, but I thought CMA was 'fired' at Arkansas because a new AD wanted to name his own coach.
CMA's record at Arkansas was 78 - 75 in one of the toughest conferences in NCAA hoops, and 169 - 102, .624 overall, with 3 NCAA and 2 NIT appearances in eight years.
That tells me the guy is a very good - excellent coach.
Just my 2 cents.
 
[quote="fordham96" post=396297]

You do understand and others as well that Mike Anderson was fired from a second tier SEC program right? Simple reason was he wasn't winning enough.

I am not saying it makes him a bad coach or negates a pretty good coaching career or even means he won't get SJU going in a good direction.

But people seem to forget this salient fact when they recount his resume[/quote]

Well, it's true that he wasn't winning enough for Arkansas. My view is that the program had unreasonable/unrealistic expectations. His last 3 years there Anderson was 26-10, 23-11 and 18-16 with two NCAA appearances and an NIT appearance.

Four years ago he was 16-16 with no post-season, but the two years before that he was 27-9 and 22-12 with an NCAA appearance and an NIT appearance.

And his program finished 3rd in the league twice and second once in those 6 years, so I'm not sure "second-tier" would be entirely accurate (otoh he was 9th twice and 5th once in the other 3 years, so it isn't totally off-base either).

One would think that three NCAA appearances and two NIT appearances in 6 years would be "winning enough" for St John's fans (along with finishing in the top-third of the league two-thirds of the time) considering that our program has basically the same total of NCAA and NIT appearances in the last 17 years (while finishing in the top third of the league all of two times in those 17 years).

What I've read from Arkansas fans is that Anderson was fired because he couldn't beat Kentucky. I wish them the best of luck finding someone who can. If ultimately the criticism of Anderson here is that he can't beat Nova, while finishing in the top third of the league 5 out of 6 years (which would be the NCAA tournament almost every year) - I can live with that.

Why some people think that our program, whose claim to glory is ONE FINAL FOUR APPEARANCE THIRTY-FIVE YEARS AGO should somehow be Duke-Kansas-Kentucky level IMMEDIATELY never ceases to amaze me (not directed at you, Fordham).
 
fordham96 Wrote: You do understand and others as well that Mike Anderson was fired from a second tier SEC program right? Simple reason was he wasn't winning enough.

I am not saying it makes him a bad coach or negates a pretty good coaching career or even means he won't get SJU going in a good direction.

But people seem to forget this salient fact when they recount his resume

I don't know about anybody else but I have certainly not forgotten that fact. Personally to me though, that fact does not mean much at all.

Mike Anderson has had a really good track record where ever he has gone. Getting fired from a previous coaching job is no crime and actually puts Mike Anderson in some pretty good company.

Joe Torre and Casey Stengel piled up tons of World Championships with the Yankees but were fired multiple times as managers before their Hall of Fame Managerial careers with the Bronx Bombers.

The Giants took a chance on a fired head Coach Tom Coughlin and won a couple of Super Bowls with him at the helm. How many teams would have taken a chance on a fired coach of the lowly Cleveland Browns. Well the New England Patriots did and gave Bill Bellichick a shot. Nine Super Bowl appearances later it looks like a pretty damned good move to me.

I just see nothing but good in Mike Anderson. From his integrity, ability to run a clean program, to his coaching acumen, to his positive demeanor, to his consistent winning record, to cultivating loyalty from his players and staff and to his incredible work ethic his list of positives are all over the place. We are very lucky to have him. If someone else fired him previously, that is not disqualifying to me in any way, shape or form.

Wrongful terminations happen all the time.

If Browns owner Art Modell was still alive today you could ask him this question:

Knowing what we know today would you have still fired Bill Bellichick and brought in Ted Marchibroda in 1996 to replace him as head coach of the Browns?

Any child knows the answer to that one.
 
Last edited:
Bottom line......winning.

CMA has taken over a program that has essentially lived in the bottom half of it's conference for the past two decades. As a result, you have to accept that we are not exactly the most attractive destination for recruits. Winning is the only thing that can really change that. As conference wins, upsets, exciting MSG contests, and media attention piles up, bigger wins on the recruiting trail will follow. But, regardless of our history, we have to accept that we are building a foundation.

CMA will do it the right way. He is assembling a competitive roster with high character talent and has an indisputable track record of getting the most out of his teams. A moderate increase in winning must come before consistent recruiting success. Expecting the recruiting victories before the winning, is just unrealistic.
 
Last edited:
I love the style of play that CMA employs. I’ll trust that we will eventually attack more, and better, hard nosed players that we’ll be happy to fondly remember years after they finish playing.
 
[quote="lawmanfan" post=396302][quote="fordham96" post=396297]

You do understand and others as well that Mike Anderson was fired from a second tier SEC program right? Simple reason was he wasn't winning enough.

I am not saying it makes him a bad coach or negates a pretty good coaching career or even means he won't get SJU going in a good direction.

But people seem to forget this salient fact when they recount his resume[/quote]

Well, it's true that he wasn't winning enough for Arkansas. My view is that the program had unreasonable/unrealistic expectations. His last 3 years there Anderson was 26-10, 23-11 and 18-16 with two NCAA appearances and an NIT appearance.

Four years ago he was 16-16 with no post-season, but the two years before that he was 27-9 and 22-12 with an NCAA appearance and an NIT appearance.

And his program finished 3rd in the league twice and second once in those 6 years, so I'm not sure "second-tier" would be entirely accurate (otoh he was 9th twice and 5th once in the other 3 years, so it isn't totally off-base either).

One would think that three NCAA appearances and two NIT appearances in 6 years would be "winning enough" for St John's fans (along with finishing in the top-third of the league two-thirds of the time) considering that our program has basically the same total of NCAA and NIT appearances in the last 17 years (while finishing in the top third of the league all of two times in those 17 years).

What I've read from Arkansas fans is that Anderson was fired because he couldn't beat Kentucky. I wish them the best of luck finding someone who can. If ultimately the criticism of Anderson here is that he can't beat Nova, while finishing in the top third of the league 5 out of 6 years (which would be the NCAA tournament almost every year) - I can live with that.

Why some people think that our program, whose claim to glory is ONE FINAL FOUR APPEARANCE THIRTY-FIVE YEARS AGO should somehow be Duke-Kansas-Kentucky level IMMEDIATELY never ceases to amaze me (not directed at you, Fordham).[/quote]

Come on.

Everyone can hypothetically say "he was fired for having unreal expectations." I believe that excuse was used at UCLA several times including for Lavin.

So what. That doesn't excuse the fact that he has had some very mediocre years. And they thought they were getting Nolan Richardson II.

And how would you know what the expectations should be at Arkansaa.

Should Kevin Ollie have been fired?
 
[quote="Chicago Days" post=396300][quote="fordham96" post=396297][quote="lawmanfan" post=396294][quote="austour" post=396282][quote="NCJohnnie" post=396163]Let's move on. Constructive criticism is fine and valued, constant negativity sucks. My 2 cents.[/quote]

A lot of the negative criticism is constructive. The problem is when posters don't seem to get that they are turning into trolls.[/quote]

Meh. I don't think that the criticism I've read about the recruiting - during a pandemic - of a coach in his second year at a second- or third-tier program is constructive at all.

If the man clearly couldn't coach and his past track record was based purely on recruiting (in other words, if he was something very much like Steve Lavin), then I might see it the other way. Same might be true if this was year 3 or 4 and the team hadn't made the NCAA tournament.

You might even have me at "constructive" if it was year 4 or 5 and the team had gotten to a couple of NCAA tournaments and gotten knocked out because of a clear talent gap.

But right now? Without seeing one second of the multiple players that have been added to the program? Without playing so much as a scrimmage? Not constructive at all, IMHO. Just unconstructively negative.

To the extent that's because of the program history, I get it. I've been here longer than most, so I fully understand that it takes either a fair degree of intestinal fortitude or a masochistic streak to still be here. But then again, nobody is forcing anyone to be fan, either.[/quote]

You do understand and others as well that Mike Anderson was fired from a second tier SEC program right? Simple reason was he wasn't winning enough.

I am not saying it makes him a bad coach or negates a pretty good coaching career or even means he won't get SJU going in a good direction.

But people seem to forget this salient fact when they recount his resume[/quote]

I may be wrong, but I thought CMA was 'fired' at Arkansas because a new AD wanted to name his own coach.
CMA's record at Arkansas was 78 - 75 in one of the toughest conferences in NCAA hoops, and 169 - 102, .624 overall, with 3 NCAA and 2 NIT appearances in eight years.
That tells me the guy is a very good - excellent coach.
Just my 2 cents.[/quote]

Right so if Anderson was coming off of a 31-5 season he would've still been fired because the AD had to have his coach.

Uhhhh no.
 
The fact is the moment Nolan Richardson won a National championship expectations going forward increased exponentially for every future coach!
 
[quote="fordham96" post=396321][quote="lawmanfan" post=396302][quote="fordham96" post=396297]

You do understand and others as well that Mike Anderson was fired from a second tier SEC program right? Simple reason was he wasn't winning enough.

I am not saying it makes him a bad coach or negates a pretty good coaching career or even means he won't get SJU going in a good direction.

But people seem to forget this salient fact when they recount his resume[/quote]

Well, it's true that he wasn't winning enough for Arkansas. My view is that the program had unreasonable/unrealistic expectations. His last 3 years there Anderson was 26-10, 23-11 and 18-16 with two NCAA appearances and an NIT appearance.

Four years ago he was 16-16 with no post-season, but the two years before that he was 27-9 and 22-12 with an NCAA appearance and an NIT appearance.

And his program finished 3rd in the league twice and second once in those 6 years, so I'm not sure "second-tier" would be entirely accurate (otoh he was 9th twice and 5th once in the other 3 years, so it isn't totally off-base either).

One would think that three NCAA appearances and two NIT appearances in 6 years would be "winning enough" for St John's fans (along with finishing in the top-third of the league two-thirds of the time) considering that our program has basically the same total of NCAA and NIT appearances in the last 17 years (while finishing in the top third of the league all of two times in those 17 years).

What I've read from Arkansas fans is that Anderson was fired because he couldn't beat Kentucky. I wish them the best of luck finding someone who can. If ultimately the criticism of Anderson here is that he can't beat Nova, while finishing in the top third of the league 5 out of 6 years (which would be the NCAA tournament almost every year) - I can live with that.

Why some people think that our program, whose claim to glory is ONE FINAL FOUR APPEARANCE THIRTY-FIVE YEARS AGO should somehow be Duke-Kansas-Kentucky level IMMEDIATELY never ceases to amaze me (not directed at you, Fordham).[/quote]

Come on.

Everyone can hypothetically say "he was fired for having unreal expectations." I believe that excuse was used at UCLA several times including for Lavin.

So what. That doesn't excuse the fact that he has had some very mediocre years. And they thought they were getting Nolan Richardson II.

And how would you know what the expectations should be at Arkansaa.

Should Kevin Ollie have been fired?[/quote]

Btw Lavin went 46-44 and went to 2 NCAAs and 2 NITs at SJU. A second tier BE program as you stated in a MUCH DEEPER TOUGHER BE. That is comparable to Andersons run at Arky, no? Did u stand up for Lavin when he got fired? I think you owe him an apology, no?
 
Guys real quick all I said was Anderson was fired at Arkansaa for performance. He didn't win enough. That is an undeniable fact.

I didn't give an opinion over whether I thought it was justifiable or not.

But it is a part of his resume that is a fact.

Rick Bsrnes had a tremendous run st Texas and he parted with them. Tennessee is pretty happy they got em, no?
 
fordham96:
You do understand and others as well that Mike Anderson was fired from a second tier SEC program right? Simple reason was he wasn't winning enough.

I am not saying it makes him a bad coach or negates a pretty good coaching career or even means he won't get SJU going in a good direction.

But people seem to forget this salient fact when they recount his resume

Chicago Days:
I may be wrong, but I thought CMA was 'fired' at Arkansas because a new AD wanted to name his own coach.
CMA's record at Arkansas was 78 - 75 in one of the toughest conferences in NCAA hoops, and 169 - 102, .624 overall, with 3 NCAA and 2 NIT appearances in eight years.
That tells me the guy is a very good - excellent coach.
Just my 2 cents.

fordham96:
Right so if Anderson was coming off of a 31-5 season he would've still been fired because the AD had to have his coach.

Uhhhh no.

Chicago Days:
Excellent point! You nailed it, fordham: His 18 - 16, 8 -10 record in 2018-19--with a young team-- allowed Yurachek to fire Mike.
But 169 - 107, 78 -75, 3 NCAA & 2 NIT appearances in 8 years?
I'd bet ~98% of all posters would sign up for that in a blink.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top