I was working at Ottawa University in 1988 (just down the road from Lawrence) when they hired a young unknown North Carolina Assistant named Roy Williams and fans were outraged that this was the best they could hire
Larry Brown had gotten the jayhawks on probation and bolted for the NBA...and their program appeared in shambles...but this mousey looking guy who liked the cartoon character Deputy Dog quickly righted the ship.
The guy ended up working out pretty good for them until he ended up going BACK to North Carolina (when approached the SECOND time by his mentor and idol Dean Smith.
We are in the process of hiring our 7th Head Coach since Norm retired in 1999...kansas is only on their 7th Coach since James Naismith (who is the only HC in their history who has a career losing record BTW)
The jayhawks have only HAD eight different head coaches in the history of their program going back to the guy who invented the game and started their program in 1898.
At Mizzou we started our program eight years later and we have gone through 20 head coaches comparatively...and that includes a head coach who was in place for nearly a third of our history (32 years by Norm Stewart).
MY QUESTION IS THIS: Does kansas just do a better job of hiring Head Coaches? Or do Head Coaches have more success and longer tenures there because they are kansas rather than Mizzou?
The easy answer is: "Because they CHEAT"...and maybe it really is as simple as that. The jayhawls are always great at basketball...but always shitty at football...WHY is that?
I think we really have to ask ourselves: "IS there anything else to it?"
Maybe instead of just firing and hiring new coaches every 3 to 5 years...we need to analyze WHY we seem to hire so poorly...and WHY our Coaches tend to fail.
Do we just hire poorly" Or do we simply not provide our Head Basketball Coaches the necessary tools and environment to succeed?
If it is more of the latter...then we need to fix THAT and put an end to this continuous cycle of changing Head Coaches every few years.
― Henry Ford
Larry Brown had gotten the jayhawks on probation and bolted for the NBA...and their program appeared in shambles...but this mousey looking guy who liked the cartoon character Deputy Dog quickly righted the ship.
The guy ended up working out pretty good for them until he ended up going BACK to North Carolina (when approached the SECOND time by his mentor and idol Dean Smith.
We are in the process of hiring our 7th Head Coach since Norm retired in 1999...kansas is only on their 7th Coach since James Naismith (who is the only HC in their history who has a career losing record BTW)
The jayhawks have only HAD eight different head coaches in the history of their program going back to the guy who invented the game and started their program in 1898.
At Mizzou we started our program eight years later and we have gone through 20 head coaches comparatively...and that includes a head coach who was in place for nearly a third of our history (32 years by Norm Stewart).
MY QUESTION IS THIS: Does kansas just do a better job of hiring Head Coaches? Or do Head Coaches have more success and longer tenures there because they are kansas rather than Mizzou?
The easy answer is: "Because they CHEAT"...and maybe it really is as simple as that. The jayhawls are always great at basketball...but always shitty at football...WHY is that?
I think we really have to ask ourselves: "IS there anything else to it?"
Maybe instead of just firing and hiring new coaches every 3 to 5 years...we need to analyze WHY we seem to hire so poorly...and WHY our Coaches tend to fail.
Do we just hire poorly" Or do we simply not provide our Head Basketball Coaches the necessary tools and environment to succeed?
If it is more of the latter...then we need to fix THAT and put an end to this continuous cycle of changing Head Coaches every few years.
“If you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always got.”
― Henry Ford
