Here's the why he got fired post for perspective
I wrote two versions of this post. This is the “why Barry Odom is staying” version. It’s the shorter of the two.
First, let’s be clear: Firing Odom was a definite possibility. it was considered. There were discussions about it. In the end, following a meeting between Odom and Director of Athletics Jim Sterk on Saturday morning, Mizzou announced Odom was coming back for a fifth season.
That’s not likely to go over real well with the die-hard fans. Those that hadn’t already decided Odom wasn’t the right guy at some point in his first three and a half years mostly did in the last six weeks when Mizzou lost five straight games and entirely forgot how to play offense. So what Sterk did wasn’t the easy way out or the popular decision.
Early this week, all the information we had was that Odom was coaching his last game on Friday in Little Rock. I lost count of how many people told me that and every one of them said, “The decision is already made. Friday doesn’t matter.” Obviously, at some point, that changed.
Why?
There are some people in position to have input who think Odom should get another year. It seems the those people convinced Sterk of that in the last few days. As we said, there were discussions among decision makers at Missouri about Odom’s future in the last few days. We were told that names of potential replacements were even discussed. I wrote a week ago that Sterk couldn’t make this move if he wasn’t very, very confident that he had a replacement who was going to take the job who was an upgrade over Odom in his mind and would be the same in the opinion of the fanbase.
In the end, that’s what this comes down to. Odom is staying because Missouri’s athletic director didn’t feel like he could get someone better.
You can argue that anyone would have been better (and I’m sure some of you reading this will argue exactly that) but your opinion doesn’t matter. Only Sterk’s matters and Sterk apparently felt anyone who he could get to take the job wouldn’t be an upgrade…or at least not enough of an upgrade to go through the change and added expense.
I heard three names from places I tend to believe: Matt Campbell, Mike Norvell and Billy Napier. Campbell would have been tough. One person told me Missouri looked into it but it wasn’t likely to happen. Norvell is more realistic. But he’s involved with Florida State, which is likely going to pay more and I don’t think Missouri was ready to make a move to see itself lose a bidding war. With Napier, I was told by someone who knows him that he had no interest in talking to Arkansas and likely wouldn’t have much interest in Missouri. I don’t know if Missouri checked or not, or if that was communicated, but that’s what I was told. It sounds like Napier is content in Louisiana until a more Southeastern SEC job opens up.
The question then is why? Is Missouri that bad a job?
Let’s be honest. It’s not a great job. There are three things that come into play when you’re looking to hire a coach.
Program history: Missouri is better than Vandy and Kentucky here. It’s better than Ole Miss and Arkansas in the last couple of decades. It’s better than Mississippi State historically, but not recently and probably a little better than South Carolina. So being generous, the history of the program here is probably 8th in the SEC.
Program support: Missouri is supported better than Vanderbilt. It’s similar to Ole Miss and Mississippi State. So at best, it’s 11th in the league.
Recruiting footprint: Missouri again is better than Vandy. It’s at a disadvantage when you compare it to every other program in the SEC. Kentucky has found a foothold in Ohio, Tennessee still has much more of a regional name, the rest are closer to more talent. So that’s 13th/14
Add those three up and in the factors that matter, Missouri is 11th of 14 in the SEC. Now, that doesn’t mean you can’t get anyone good to take the job here. It just means you’re limited a little bit. And when the guy you have is an alum who has two straight bowl games and was .500 this year despite going through an absolute mess with the NCAA and some significant injuries, the conclusion of those in charge was obviously that the candidate pool didn’t merit making a move right now.
Those who are most vocal against this hire will as a complex question, but a valid one: How do you sell to the fanbase that you’re dedicated to being great when you bring back a guy who is .500 through four years and whom the fans have never really bought into as evidenced by the attendance and general lack of excitement around the program?
Honestly, it’s tough. There are two things to consider here, though:
Let’s not pretend Missouri fans are at a fever pitch for anything right now. They had a baseball team that looked like it was headed to the NCAA Tournament most of last season and nobody showed up. They’ve got a basketball team that a lot of people were excited about coached by a guy the fans have been in love with for two years and home games are dead and they had to put curtains over the upper deck of the Sprint Center for two games this week. People are going to say I’m blaming fans here and I’m really not. More fans show up for teams that are winning and Missouri isn’t winning much of anything right now. But the point is, a new coach isn’t some cure all that’s going to suddenly fill the stands next year.
Despite the opinions of the vocal online Missouri fans, Odom hasn’t been disastrous. He hasn’t hit the point where you’re looking at it and saying there is absolutely no way you can keep him. He took over a bad situation and had a bad first year. He had a terrible start to year two and turned it around. Year three was similar. He lost two games in year three he probably should have won and he lost at least two in year four he should have won. It’s a problem, but he also has enough talent assembled that he has been favored in 30 of 38 games.
The last two years have been disappointments, particularly this one. But Odom hasn’t been that far off. Let’s illustrate:
Change the pass interference call against DeMarkus Acy in last year’s Kentucky game. If you do that (and most agree it was a terrible call that came with no time on the clock and completely changed the outcome), Odom is 9-3 in the regular season last year. The Tigers get a better bowl game against a different opponent. Maybe they win it. Either way, if they go 9-4 or 10-3 last year, nobody is talking about firing him for going 6-6 this year. It’s a down year and a disappointment, but he’s got enough equity built up that he’s not losing his job. This isn’t necessarily an argument he should keep his job, but it’s an illustration of just how thin the line is between guys that get fired and guys that don’t. Change one call and I would argue we aren’t having this discussion.
Now, what’s this mean for the future? Well, it ain’t all that great. Odom will come back next year on the hottest seat in the SEC this side of Derek Mason. He’s coming back to work for a guy who was looking into replacing him and who turned down multiple chances to support him in the last few weeks. He’s going to have to win. A losing record will almost certainly get him fired. A .500 record again very well might. There’s going to be a lot of pressure. Other coaches are going to use it against them on the recruiting trail. The relationship with his boss would seem to be, at best, strained. And it probably hasn’t been ideal to begin with.
You can argue it’s the wrong decision and many will. But the decision has been made. Now we see where it goes.
I wrote two versions of this post. This is the “why Barry Odom is staying” version. It’s the shorter of the two.
First, let’s be clear: Firing Odom was a definite possibility. it was considered. There were discussions about it. In the end, following a meeting between Odom and Director of Athletics Jim Sterk on Saturday morning, Mizzou announced Odom was coming back for a fifth season.
That’s not likely to go over real well with the die-hard fans. Those that hadn’t already decided Odom wasn’t the right guy at some point in his first three and a half years mostly did in the last six weeks when Mizzou lost five straight games and entirely forgot how to play offense. So what Sterk did wasn’t the easy way out or the popular decision.
Early this week, all the information we had was that Odom was coaching his last game on Friday in Little Rock. I lost count of how many people told me that and every one of them said, “The decision is already made. Friday doesn’t matter.” Obviously, at some point, that changed.
Why?
There are some people in position to have input who think Odom should get another year. It seems the those people convinced Sterk of that in the last few days. As we said, there were discussions among decision makers at Missouri about Odom’s future in the last few days. We were told that names of potential replacements were even discussed. I wrote a week ago that Sterk couldn’t make this move if he wasn’t very, very confident that he had a replacement who was going to take the job who was an upgrade over Odom in his mind and would be the same in the opinion of the fanbase.
In the end, that’s what this comes down to. Odom is staying because Missouri’s athletic director didn’t feel like he could get someone better.
You can argue that anyone would have been better (and I’m sure some of you reading this will argue exactly that) but your opinion doesn’t matter. Only Sterk’s matters and Sterk apparently felt anyone who he could get to take the job wouldn’t be an upgrade…or at least not enough of an upgrade to go through the change and added expense.
I heard three names from places I tend to believe: Matt Campbell, Mike Norvell and Billy Napier. Campbell would have been tough. One person told me Missouri looked into it but it wasn’t likely to happen. Norvell is more realistic. But he’s involved with Florida State, which is likely going to pay more and I don’t think Missouri was ready to make a move to see itself lose a bidding war. With Napier, I was told by someone who knows him that he had no interest in talking to Arkansas and likely wouldn’t have much interest in Missouri. I don’t know if Missouri checked or not, or if that was communicated, but that’s what I was told. It sounds like Napier is content in Louisiana until a more Southeastern SEC job opens up.
The question then is why? Is Missouri that bad a job?
Let’s be honest. It’s not a great job. There are three things that come into play when you’re looking to hire a coach.
Program history: Missouri is better than Vandy and Kentucky here. It’s better than Ole Miss and Arkansas in the last couple of decades. It’s better than Mississippi State historically, but not recently and probably a little better than South Carolina. So being generous, the history of the program here is probably 8th in the SEC.
Program support: Missouri is supported better than Vanderbilt. It’s similar to Ole Miss and Mississippi State. So at best, it’s 11th in the league.
Recruiting footprint: Missouri again is better than Vandy. It’s at a disadvantage when you compare it to every other program in the SEC. Kentucky has found a foothold in Ohio, Tennessee still has much more of a regional name, the rest are closer to more talent. So that’s 13th/14
Add those three up and in the factors that matter, Missouri is 11th of 14 in the SEC. Now, that doesn’t mean you can’t get anyone good to take the job here. It just means you’re limited a little bit. And when the guy you have is an alum who has two straight bowl games and was .500 this year despite going through an absolute mess with the NCAA and some significant injuries, the conclusion of those in charge was obviously that the candidate pool didn’t merit making a move right now.
Those who are most vocal against this hire will as a complex question, but a valid one: How do you sell to the fanbase that you’re dedicated to being great when you bring back a guy who is .500 through four years and whom the fans have never really bought into as evidenced by the attendance and general lack of excitement around the program?
Honestly, it’s tough. There are two things to consider here, though:
Let’s not pretend Missouri fans are at a fever pitch for anything right now. They had a baseball team that looked like it was headed to the NCAA Tournament most of last season and nobody showed up. They’ve got a basketball team that a lot of people were excited about coached by a guy the fans have been in love with for two years and home games are dead and they had to put curtains over the upper deck of the Sprint Center for two games this week. People are going to say I’m blaming fans here and I’m really not. More fans show up for teams that are winning and Missouri isn’t winning much of anything right now. But the point is, a new coach isn’t some cure all that’s going to suddenly fill the stands next year.
Despite the opinions of the vocal online Missouri fans, Odom hasn’t been disastrous. He hasn’t hit the point where you’re looking at it and saying there is absolutely no way you can keep him. He took over a bad situation and had a bad first year. He had a terrible start to year two and turned it around. Year three was similar. He lost two games in year three he probably should have won and he lost at least two in year four he should have won. It’s a problem, but he also has enough talent assembled that he has been favored in 30 of 38 games.
The last two years have been disappointments, particularly this one. But Odom hasn’t been that far off. Let’s illustrate:
Change the pass interference call against DeMarkus Acy in last year’s Kentucky game. If you do that (and most agree it was a terrible call that came with no time on the clock and completely changed the outcome), Odom is 9-3 in the regular season last year. The Tigers get a better bowl game against a different opponent. Maybe they win it. Either way, if they go 9-4 or 10-3 last year, nobody is talking about firing him for going 6-6 this year. It’s a down year and a disappointment, but he’s got enough equity built up that he’s not losing his job. This isn’t necessarily an argument he should keep his job, but it’s an illustration of just how thin the line is between guys that get fired and guys that don’t. Change one call and I would argue we aren’t having this discussion.
Now, what’s this mean for the future? Well, it ain’t all that great. Odom will come back next year on the hottest seat in the SEC this side of Derek Mason. He’s coming back to work for a guy who was looking into replacing him and who turned down multiple chances to support him in the last few weeks. He’s going to have to win. A losing record will almost certainly get him fired. A .500 record again very well might. There’s going to be a lot of pressure. Other coaches are going to use it against them on the recruiting trail. The relationship with his boss would seem to be, at best, strained. And it probably hasn’t been ideal to begin with.
You can argue it’s the wrong decision and many will. But the decision has been made. Now we see where it goes.
