Boylen

[Goatnapper'96]

It has absolutely nothing to do with your posts. It has to do with taking over a team that was 81-101 the past six years, making them 13-9 (5-5 Big East) so far in his FIRST YEAR, and this:

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/recruiting/school/_/id/2599/st-john-red-storm

It has to do with results. Take a look at what Lavin has done in ONE YEAR and tell me we should be patient with this train wreck Boylen has caused in four years.

I have been in Hawaii and word travels slow out this way, but did the U just lose a home game to Air Force? You should update that in your bio about the U as you list the teams BYU has beaten this year!

[TripletDaddy]

It has absolutely nothing to do with your posts. It has to do with taking over a team that was 81-101 the past six years, making them 13-9 (5-5 Big East) so far in his FIRST YEAR, and this:

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/recruiting/school/_/id/2599/st-john-red-storm

It has to do with results. Take a look at what Lavin has done in ONE YEAR and tell me we should be patient with this train wreck Boylen has caused in four years.

I'm ambivalent towards Boylen.

I was saying the entire time that Lavin is a great coach. You were the one that was slagging him previously. Obviously you have realized the error of your ways and now agree with me, ESPN, and the Big East.

[Goatnapper'96]

I'm ambivalent towards Boylen.

I was saying the entire time that Lavin is a great coach. You were the one that was slagging him previously. Obviously you have realized the error of your ways and now agree with me, ESPN, and the Big East.

I don't think Lavin was a great coach. He was and is a very good recruiter but his teams chronically lost games that they should not. They played well in the tourney though. I can't recall, was a HC before his stint at UCLA?

I just checked, it was his first HC gig. I think he will do a decent job at SJU as he is a great recruiter, but I doubt the team is ever excellent. Ben Howland is a much better coach, but probably not as good a recruiter.

[TripletDaddy]

I don't think Lavin was a great coach. He was and is a very good recruiter but his teams chronically lost games that they should not. They played well in the tourney though. I can't recall, was a HC before his stint at UCLA?

I just checked, it was his first HC gig. I think he will do a decent job at SJU as he is a great recruiter, but I doubt the team is ever excellent. Ben Howland is a much better coach, but probably not as good a recruiter.

A great coach doesn't have an excellent team. That would be an excellent coach.

Go Middies!

[Goatnapper'96]

A great coach doesn't have an excellent team. That would be an excellent coach.

Go Middies!

I think a great coach would have done more with the talent Lavin had at UCLA. When you have as many top rated recruiting classes and never finish higher than 3rd in the Pac-10 and don't get beyond the sweet 16 then there is an issue with the ability to coach, IMO.

I don't think Lavin ever had an excellent team at UCLA. Do you? I think his first team might have made the Elite 8 but my memory is after that he could never get beyond 3rd in Pac-10 or beyond the sweet 16.

Helluva recruiter, however.

[TripletDaddy]

I think a great coach would have done more with the talent Lavin had at UCLA. When you have as many top rated recruiting classes and never finish higher than 3rd in the Pac-10 and don't get beyond the sweet 16 then there is an issue with the ability to coach, IMO.

I don't think Lavin ever had an excellent team at UCLA. Do you? I think his first team might have made the Elite 8 but my memory is after that he could never get beyond 3rd in Pac-10 or beyond the sweet 16.

Helluva recruiter, however.

I'm saying he was a great coach...he had great teams. I didn't say he was an excellent coach, which would explain his lack of excellent teams. He went to the tournament almost all of the time and was a staple in the sweet sixteen. That right there makes him more successful that pretty much most other coaches in D1. Sure enough, after sitting out of the game, he gets back in at SJU and he is back to his old winning ways. Yes, I'd say Lavin is a great coach.

[Goatnapper'96]

I'm saying he was a great coach...he had great teams. I didn't say he was an excellent coach, which would explain his lack of excellent teams. He went to the tournament almost all of the time and was a staple in the sweet sixteen. That right there makes him more successful that pretty much most other coaches in D1. Sure enough, after sitting out of the game, he gets back in at SJU and he is back to his old winning ways. Yes, I'd say Lavin is a great coach.

Lavin strikes me as one of those coaches who can take bad teams to being average, but just doesn't have it to make them great. Perhaps we are saying the same things but it is semantics. I would put Lavin as an above average coach. Probably more accurately defined as an average coach but a great recruiter. Together, he had above average performances, when one considers his resources. I view Lavin's performance at UCLA similarly to what Steve Cleveland did at BYU. He lacked consistency. His teams at UCLA could play well, as they were talented but throughout the course of a season his average coaching skills were exposed with all too frequent losses to inferior teams.

[Surfah]

http://www.lvrj.com/sports/rice-more-than-ready-to-become-head-coach-115707209.html

But there might not be a more important decision Rice makes than where he accepts his first head coaching role. Would the sparse recruiting proximity to players in Wyoming make him pause? Would it make enough financial sense to move his wife and two sons to Laramie and leave such a solid position at BYU?

Is he a better fit at Utah if that program were to make a change? (Yes.) I'm not sure the Utes, if they went in another direction from Jim Boylen, would hire a first-time head coach heading into the Pac-12 because you know there would be a concern about losing the news conference.

It's a mistake many athletic directors make. They care more about instant reaction than long-term viability. Rice would be a long-term answer.

If you know him, you know he wouldn't talk about any job publicly, that until BYU is eliminated from the NCAA Tournament, his sole focus remains on the team's pursuit to play deep into March.

But his time is coming.

[SeattleUte]

http://www.lvrj.com/sports/rice-more...115707209.html

No thanks.

[KillerDog]

No thanks.

The U faithful would be lucky to get him. He would make you all happy. The problem I see is in the fan reaction. Rice would be a risky hire after failing badly on Giac and Boylen.

[Surfah]

The U faithful would be lucky to get him. He would make you all happy. The problem I see is in the fan reaction. Rice would be a risky hire after failing badly on Giac and Boylen.

Which is why I thought it was a good article. The author said exactly that. Rice has led BYU's recruiting and offense for 4 years now. He's got an in at one of the top prep schools from which he'll probably be able to pull talent. He took over BYU's program when Rose got sick and they didn't miss a beat. Why Utes continue to dog Rice is beyond me. Like you they would be lucky to get Rice. I guess this explains much as to why the Utes and their fans are where they at. I have always said my short list would be Bennett and then Rice.

[cougjunkie]

Which is why I thought it was a good article. The author said exactly that. Rice has led BYU's recruiting and offense for 4 years now. He's got an in at one of the top prep schools from which he'll probably be able to pull talent. He took over BYU's program when Rose got sick and they didn't miss a beat. Why Utes continue to dog Rice is beyond me. Like you they would be lucky to get Rice. I guess this explains much as to why the Utes and their fans are where they at. I have always said my short list would be Bennett and then Rice.

Because like UNLV fans, Utah fans have unrealistic expectations. They have zero sense of reality and think that because they had a nice 2 year run under Majerus 15 years ago they should be at that level year in and year out. When in reality they are an upper tier mid-major at best regardless of what conference they play in. They will make the occassional sweet 16 run, make the tourney 6 out of 10 years and finish at the bottom half of the conference every so often. That is who they are and the sooner they realize that the more happy they will be with current state of the program.

[LA Ute]

Which is why I thought it was a good article. The author said exactly that. Rice has led BYU's recruiting and offense for 4 years now. He's got an in at one of the top prep schools from which he'll probably be able to pull talent. He took over BYU's program when Rose got sick and they didn't miss a beat. Why Utes continue to dog Rice is beyond me. Like you they would be lucky to get Rice. I guess this explains much as to why the Utes and their fans are where they at. I have always said my short list would be Bennett and then Rice.

We don't want another assistant coach without a solid record of head coaching experience.

[SeattleUte]

It has absolutely nothing to do with your posts. It has to do with taking over a team that was 81-101 the past six years, making them 13-9 (5-5 Big East) so far in his FIRST YEAR, and this:

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/recruiting/school/_/id/2599/st-john-red-storm

It has to do with results. Take a look at what Lavin has done in ONE YEAR and tell me we should be patient with this train wreck Boylen has caused in four years.

SWISH!

[ame="http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=310412599"]Connecticut Huskies vs. St. John's Red Storm - Recap - February 10, 2011 - ESPN[/ame]

[Top Ute]

Because like UNLV fans, Utah fans have unrealistic expectations. They have zero sense of reality and think that because they had a nice 2 year run under Majerus 15 years ago they should be at that level year in and year out. When in reality they are an upper tier mid-major at best regardless of what conference they play in. They will make the occassional sweet 16 run, make the tourney 6 out of 10 years and finish at the bottom half of the conference every so often. That is who they are and the sooner they realize that the more happy they will be with current state of the program.

We've made the tourney just once in the last six years. We should be content, by your assessment, with making it 6 out of 10, and finishing in the bottom half of the conference five of the last six years is more than "every so often." So explain to me how our frustration with our program in its current state shows we have "zero sense of reality"?