Wonderful that Monty has endorsed him and by all accounts, he has been a very capable associate HC for Cal the past few seasons. Many give him credit for our recruiting wins and believe there's material upside to him as a recruiter were he to become our head coach.

He started his coaching career as a successful HS and then JC head coach but since then has not sat in the main chair.

A couple of important considerations:

We have to discount Montgomery's endorsement to a large degree. Montgomery no longer cares about what is best for Cal, he cares far more about what is best for his assistants. Loyalty to his people is his overriding concern.

Travis has not been a D1 college head basketball coach. That makes him very risky. Were he to get the job and succeed at Cal , he would be one of the very, very few who did not succeed at a smaller school before reaching major success. The very best men's college basketball coaches almost all paid their dues and worked through the kinks coaching at a a low or mid major before ascending to the top of their profession.

IMO, Travis is a risk we cannot afford to take. Especially as Monty finished his tenure at Cal with a whimper and not a roar. This years team underperformed its talent level materially.

I wouldn't mind taking a chance on him as long as he surrounds himself with good assistants but Sandy's history says she hires coaches who have D1 head coaching experience.

CalHoopFan;842299386 said:

---

Wonderful that Monty has endorsed him and by all accounts, he has been a very capable associate HC for Cal the past few seasons. Many give him credit for our recruiting wins and believe there's material upside to him as a recruiter were he to become our head coach.

He started his coaching career as a successful HS and then JC head coach but since then has not sat in the main chair.

A couple of important considerations:

We have to discount Montgomery's endorsement to a large degree. Montgomery no longer cares about what is best for Cal, he cares far more about what is best for his assistants. Loyalty to his people is his overriding concern.

Travis has not been a D1 college head basketball coach. That makes him very risky. Were he to get the job and succeed at Cal , he would be one of the very, very few who did not succeed at a smaller school before reaching major success. The very best men's college basketball coaches almost all paid their dues and worked through the kinks coaching at a a low or mid major before ascending to the top of their profession.

IMO, Travis is a risk we cannot afford to take. Especially as Monty finished his tenure at Cal with a whimper and not a roar. This years team underperformed its talent level materially.

---

Well stated, CHF. I totally agree.

Go Coach Travis!

CalHoopFan;842299386 said:

---

Travis has not been a D1 college head basketball coach. That makes him very risky. Were he to get the job and succeed at Cal , he would be one of the very, very few who did not succeed at a smaller school before reaching major success. The very best men's college basketball coaches almost all paid their dues and worked through the kinks coaching at a a low or mid major before ascending to the top of their profession.

---

We took the same chance with Tedford.

Seth Greenberg.

Greenberg would KICK ass.

CalHoopFan;842299386 said:

---

Wonderful that Monty has endorsed him and by all accounts, he has been a very capable associate HC for Cal the past few seasons. Many give him credit for our recruiting wins and believe there's material upside to him as a recruiter were he to become our head coach.

He started his coaching career as a successful HS and then JC head coach but since then has not sat in the main chair.

A couple of important considerations:

We have to discount Montgomery's endorsement to a large degree. Montgomery no longer cares about what is best for Cal, he cares far more about what is best for his assistants. Loyalty to his people is his overriding concern.

Travis has not been a D1 college head basketball coach. That makes him very risky. Were he to get the job and succeed at Cal , he would be one of the very, very few who did not succeed at a smaller school before reaching major success. The very best men's college basketball coaches almost all paid their dues and worked through the kinks coaching at a a low or mid major before ascending to the top of their profession.

IMO, Travis is a risk we cannot afford to take. Especially as Monty finished his tenure at Cal with a whimper and not a roar. This years team underperformed its talent level materially.

---

Yes, on that last paragraph. Realize this is Praise Monty Day but listening to Barbour you'd think we won two national championships under Monty. Given how much the team underperformed this year, can't help but wonder if Monty began mailing it in. I'd go further on TD. Think it was inappropriate for Monty to endorse him so effusively. As you have mentioned, Monty has ulterior motives outside of winning basketball games (not to mention his son's predicament). Would have been fine just to acknowledge him as a candidate and wish him luck.

Hope Monty stays active in some way - maybe working as a TV commentator.

To me, there are two priorities.
1. Recruiting
2. X/O coaching

Recruiting is more important that coaching. Even Steve Lavin made it to numerous Sweet 16's.

Violations and Academic failures are show stoppers and not to be discussed here simply b/c you do not enter the interview without being able to pass on this front.

Who has TD been responsible in recruiting? That is the best indicator, for me, of whether or not he can do the job.

looking at the success Monty assts have had moving into head coaching jobs I say take the risk.

whether Cal can get a coach that will make the program a player in recruiting local players. Cal can do quite well with solid 3 star players as long as they get the occasional recruiting "win" , a 4 to 5 star in their own backyard.
Montgomery got Bird, it's a start. But who wants to come here and recruit the Bay Area and Sacramento and LA ? Cal can sacrifice the X's and O's to find that guy.

CalHoopFan;842299386 said:

---

Were he to get the job and succeed at Cal , he would be one of the very, very few who did not succeed at a smaller school before reaching major success. The very best men's college basketball coaches almost all paid their dues and worked through the kinks coaching at a a low or mid major before ascending to the top of their profession.
.

---

Some very good coaches started at major schools. Tom Izzo's first head coaching job was at Michigan State
Steve Fisher's first head coaching hob was at Michigan
John Pastner's first head coaching job was at Memphis.

It can be done.

Yes, many have started at smaller schools and moved up. But that's not always the case - and there are many other successes who started at big schools

WhatABonanza;842299421 said:

---

Some very good coaches started at major schools. Tom Izzo's first head coaching job was at Michigan State
Steve Fisher's first head coaching hob was at Michigan
John Pastner's first head coaching job was at Memphis.

It can be done.

Yes, many have started at smaller schools and moved up. But that's not always the case - and there are many other successes who started at big schools

---

Jamie Dixon, Buzz Williams (actually coached New Orleans for one season before becoming an assistant at Marquette), Kevin Ollie.

I was going to post something similar. I would say go for him if he were associate head coach for a few years on a team that is really good. He has only been the associate head coach for two years, one of which was really disappointing. The Kevin Ollie example is not a good one. That guy was an assistant on very successful teams. Same as the guy who succeeded Calipari at Memphis.

I have not heard anyone comment on Decuire's ability to coach games. Assuming he is good at recruiting, I would like to know he has some credibility in Xs and Os. Otherwise it could be Braun, redux.

^This. Good point.

I agree with many of the points but must say way too much value is placed on prior HC experience. Ability to recruit the local kids needs to be first and foremost. Fred Hoiberg at Iowa State is another example of a recent hire without previous HC experience. The new coach can always surround himself with better x and o guys as needed.

Regarding Travis, the recruiting has been very average with this staff. If an argument can be made that it changes with him as HC then I would listen.

I think he could end up being a good coach but he is a risky hire. In my opinion, he should only be hired if we can not find somebody else who has had prior head coaching success. But if at the end of the search they are looking at assistants from other schools, then they should hit TD

CHF- did the Bears materially underperform or were the coaches poor recruiters? It cannot be both IMO. This staff won 21 games this past year and went 10-8 in the Pac 12 which was pretty good this past year. So what record should this team have registered? I was disappointed by the ending up in the NIT, but the squad was thin up front and Soloman, Bird and Kreklow all missed games.

I agree that DeCuire lacks HC experience and that makes him a risk, but with him on staff the team went to 4 NCAA tourneys and 2 NIT's. I wonder how this team made any postseason tourneys with such a materially underperforming squad.

<Sigh>

This is a multi-year deal gentleman and that is why there is a binary choice which if Sandy is decent she will get to by Friday

A) Hire a stud with a name and likely 2 to 3 recruits that will follow to replace those we WILL lose
B) Hire TD on a short leash.

Lets consider what happens with scenario three - where we hire some guy like the no name down at UCI (I laugh at the idea he can "recruit". UCI LOST its way out of the tournament by choking against Cal Poly of all teams. ) VERY unclear that our 2 signees would not ask for releases. TD has been instrumental in recruiting both. Our current roster will be under intense pressure - through all the back channels that the NCAA allows - to consider transferring during the April period so the schools they end up at have a scholarship left for them. There will be much roaring of roars and knashing of teeth on BI but that is the nature of the beast.

And then, with a roster of David K, Ty and who knows who else we will try to "compete" in the Pac-12. Once again we will be looking at an unbalanced class mix. We will have to hold scholarships open to get it right. We will SUCK for several years why we get things moving back in the right direction, even if Mr UCI is the second coming of Coach K. No Thank you.

Most of you are forgetting. Transferring has become the NORM in college basketball. We are in rough seas unless Sandy does this right.

Anyone we hire will be a risk. I have no problem rolling the dice on Decuire. He may not have prior HC experience but neither did Shaka Smart when VCU hired him.

He learned under one of the greatest college coaches of all time and I believe he will be a better recruiter that Monty was. He's young and presents well to parents. Beyond that, he gets the culture at Cal and knows the opportunities and challenges we face.

Tom Izzo, Billy Donovan and Shaka Smart are not walking through the door. Why not Decuire?

UCBerkGrad;842299475 said:

---

Anyone we hire will be a risk. I have no problem rolling the dice on Decuire. He may not have prior HC experience but neither did Shaka Smart when VCU hired him.

He learned under one of the greatest college coaches of all time and I believe he will be a better recruiter that Monty was. He's young and presents well to parents. Beyond that, he gets the culture at Cal and knows the opportunities and challenges we face.

Tom Izzo, Billy Donovan and Shaka Smart are not walking through the door. Why not Decuire?

---

That is my take. We would likely hold our current players and our current signees and perhaps close the Austrian. You give him a 4-5 year deal with a cheap buy out for years 4/5. If he doesn't deliver you really are not in any worse place than if you blow up the current roster (which DID win 20+ games) by bringing in an unknown.
#thinklongterm
#playingwithwalkonssucks

socaltownie;842299471 said:

---

<Sigh>

This is a multi-year deal gentleman and that is why there is a binary choice which if Sandy is decent she will get to by Friday

A) Hire a stud with a name and likely 2 to 3 recruits that will follow to replace those we WILL lose
B) Hire TD on a short leash.

Lets consider what happens with scenario three - where we hire some guy like the no name down at UCI (I laugh at the idea he can "recruit". UCI LOST its way out of the tournament by choking against Cal Poly of all teams. ) VERY unclear that our 2 signees would not ask for releases. TD has been instrumental in recruiting both. Our current roster will be under intense pressure - through all the back channels that the NCAA allows - to consider transferring during the April period so the schools they end up at have a scholarship left for them. There will be much roaring of roars and knashing of teeth on BI but that is the nature of the beast.

And then, with a roster of David K, Ty and who knows who else we will try to "compete" in the Pac-12. Once again we will be looking at an unbalanced class mix. We will have to hold scholarships open to get it right. We will SUCK for several years why we get things moving back in the right direction, even if Mr UCI is the second coming of Coach K. No Thank you.

Most of you are forgetting. Transferring has become the NORM in college basketball. We are in rough seas unless Sandy does this right.

---

I think you are saying scenario B, unless you can tell us who you think Cal can get with Scenario A.

I'm liking Scenario B more and more.

Many of the mid-major coaches have flopped or had slow starts. Someone mentioned Mark Fox from Nevada and Georgia. Georgia has continued to have issues. Even Gregg Marshall after success at Winthrop had a slow start at Wichita St., and that was without having to face a PAC12 gauntlet.

socaltownie;842299471 said:

---

<Sigh>

This is a multi-year deal gentleman and that is why there is a binary choice which if Sandy is decent she will get to by Friday

A) Hire a stud with a name and likely 2 to 3 recruits that will follow to replace those we WILL lose
B) Hire TD on a short leash.

Lets consider what happens with scenario three - where we hire some guy like the no name down at UCI (I laugh at the idea he can "recruit". UCI LOST its way out of the tournament by choking against Cal Poly of all teams. ) VERY unclear that our 2 signees would not ask for releases. TD has been instrumental in recruiting both. Our current roster will be under intense pressure - through all the back channels that the NCAA allows - to consider transferring during the April period so the schools they end up at have a scholarship left for them. There will be much roaring of roars and knashing of teeth on BI but that is the nature of the beast.

And then, with a roster of David K, Ty and who knows who else we will try to "compete" in the Pac-12. Once again we will be looking at an unbalanced class mix. We will have to hold scholarships open to get it right. We will SUCK for several years why we get things moving back in the right direction, even if Mr UCI is the second coming of Coach K. No Thank you.

Most of you are forgetting. Transferring has become the NORM in college basketball. We are in rough seas unless Sandy does this right.

---

That's pretty much where I come out on this, though I doubt highly that anything will be in place this week. I particularly don't want a big delay in all of this, which just gives that backchannel crap more time to infiltrate.

I do wish I knew more about what Travis would do the same and do differently as HC, aside from recruiting.

socaltownie;842299476 said:

---

That is my take. We would likely hold our current players and our current signees and perhaps close the Austrian. You give him a 4-5 year deal with a cheap buy out for years 4/5. If he doesn't deliver you really are not in any worse place than if you blow up the current roster (which DID win 20+ games) by bringing in an unknown.
#thinklongterm
#playingwithwalkonssucks

---

What I see sitting there is a sophomore class that has talent, a couple of incoming freshmen who have talent, and all of those guys have close ties to Travis. That's a foundation to build on, but if that falls apart because he gets cut loose there's nothing. So yeah.

UCBerkGrad;842299475 said:

---

Anyone we hire will be a risk. I have no problem rolling the dice on Decuire. He may not have prior HC experience but neither did Shaka Smart when VCU hired him.

He learned under one of the greatest college coaches of all time and I believe he will be a better recruiter that Monty was. He's young and presents well to parents. Beyond that, he gets the culture at Cal and knows the opportunities and challenges we face.

Tom Izzo, Billy Donovan and Shaka Smart are not walking through the door. Why not Decuire?

---

For the very simple reason that he's not the best option to fill the job. Don't know why that's so hard for people to understand. Maybe if he'd been some ace recruiter it would be different, but he isn't.

socaltownie;842299476 said:

---

That is my take. We would likely hold our current players and our current signees and perhaps close the Austrian. You give him a 4-5 year deal with a cheap buy out for years 4/5. If he doesn't deliver you really are not in any worse place than if you blow up the current roster (which DID win 20+ games) by bringing in an unknown.
#thinklongterm
#playingwithwalkonssucks

---

At least when you do your shocky impersonation, you know where the # goes.

#attentionwhore

We lose little by passing on Decuire. If we make a good hire kids aren't going to flee because an assistant got let go.

buster99;842299484 said:

---

I think you are saying scenario B, unless you can tell us who you think Cal can get with Scenario A.

I'm liking Scenario B more and more.

Many of the mid-major coaches have flopped or had slow starts. Someone mentioned Mark Fox from Nevada and Georgia. Georgia has continued to have issues. Even Gregg Marshall after success at Winthrop had a slow start at Wichita St., and that was without having to face a PAC12 gauntlet.

---

I have no idea who we could get but Sandy owes the program to feel out the biggest names. You just never know since everyone is different. Maybe some really does pine for the Bay Area and being a Bear. It motivates many faculty members. But it is a short list. You can get through it in an afternoon if people are at their phones. After that, you offer TD.

GB54;842299498 said:

---

We lose little by passing on Decuire. If we make a good hire kids aren't going to flee because an assistant got let go.

---

That misreads the modern world of college basketball.

Here are some statistics to indicate the challenge that we will face. This isn't a "normal" coaching change.....actually for all the Monty love this wasn't really the way to do it unless there are things in progress that are not yet known.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-basketball/news/20130801/college-basketball-transfer-study/

socaltownie;842299516 said:

---

That misreads the modern world of college basketball.

Here are some statistics to indicate the challenge that we will face. This isn't a "normal" coaching change.....actually for all the Monty love this wasn't really the way to do it unless there are things in progress that are not yet known.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-basketball/news/20130801/college-basketball-transfer-study/

---

First of all the decision is a strategic one for the future. The decision should be made on the basis of future gain not risk aversion . Secondly Shocky tells us our players are student athletes not mercenaries. Thirdly, our players are mediocre: preserving the core NIT quarter finalists can't be the basis of the decision. Fourthly, how good a recruiter is Decluire? It's not like he's Tosh like; otherwise we'd be dealing with Lee and Gordon. Finally can he coach?

GB54;842299498 said:

---

We lose little by passing on Decuire. If we make a good hire kids aren't going to flee because an assistant got let go.

---

That's silly.....Hiring the outgoing coach's choice in order to save the recruiting class worked out great with Holmoe!:headbang

GB54;842299518 said:

---

First of all the decision is a strategic one for the future. The decision should be made on the basis of future gain not risk aversion . Secondly Shocky tells us our players are student athletes not mercenaries. Thirdly, our players are mediocre: preserving the core NIT quarter finalists can't be the basis of the decision. Fourthly, how good a recruiter is Decluire? It's not like he's Tosh like; otherwise we'd be dealing with Lee and Gordon. Finally can he coach?

---

I have to agree. This decision can't be governed by fear. Cal has to have some self-esteem here.

...Or we just finished a season where six Pac teams went to the tourney and we were not one of them. Is this the success we're trying to replicate??

GB54;842299498 said:

---

We lose little by passing on Decuire. If we make a good hire kids aren't going to flee because an assistant got let go.

---

That, and because Decuire would likely be retained much like Goltlibe was when Monty came on board.

No faith Cal will pay for a top-ish name , or pay to outbid a Utah for a Larry K. None at all. So if it's between UCI level guys, I.e has done OK at very low levels, or TD, I go TD.