Ernie Kent????

[NowherePoke]

Seriously, Cowboy Nation, answer me these two questions:

1. Who has Wyoming ever hired to coach men's basketball with a resume as strong as Ernie Kent's?
2. Who, besides Gillispie, is a realistically obtainable coach with a resume as strong as Ernie Kent's?

I fear we allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good around here a little too often.

1. Probably nobody, although I would continue to debate the strength of that resume. He had two elite eights, which is incredible (I mean, what are the odds that Wyoming would hire a coach in any sport with two top 8 finishes in their sport in the last decade?). However, those years were surrounded by a lot of mediocrity, to the point that his overall PAC-10 record was 109-125. If he can't finish above .500 at a top half conference job (not saying it always was a top half job as I know it wasn't, but it was by the time Ernie got there, look at OU football and the impact that Nike and $$$ has had on its relative standing), what makes us think he can do it here?

2. I think the BCG ship has long since sailed (honestly, I was very skeptical that it was ever even possible, but it turns out I may have been wrong), so I am not one that is pining for BCG. I am looking for the best coach possible. I don't believe that is Kent. JMO.


What do Oregon fans think of Kent?

 

[JimmyDimes]

We need to go out and get our Steve Fischer, baggage or not. Hire the highest profile coach who can bring this program back to being competitive.

I don't think the Wyoming faithful would give the new coach as much time as it took Fisher to build something at SDSU. This might be the year he finally coaches SDSU to a tourney win.

 

[NowherePoke]

We need to go out and get our Steve Fischer, baggage or not. Hire the highest profile coach who can bring this program back to being competitive.

I don't think the Wyoming faithful would give the new coach as much time as it took Fisher to build something at SDSU. This might be the year he finally coaches SDSU to a tourney win.

Probably true, although Fisher had a couple of things working in his favor. The first is that he took over a terrible program and brought them back to respectability by year 3 or so (Kind of Joe Glenn-esque in that regard). He then had a couple of years that were disappointing before winning the league going away in 2005-2006. So, he never had a sustained stretch of disappointing play.

Nonetheless there were many Aztec fans very ticked off at Fisher until this past year.

 

[LawPoke]

My concern is that Kent is not an X's and O's guy - granted, most of my info comes from message boards, but it was also hinted at in the press following the surprise extension he received and leading up to and following his firing from Oregon.

Count me as one of those that is flat sick and tired of watching an offense with no movement. I want to see movement, solid screens - and get a sense that there is some plan. McClain's "drive and try to score with 2 seconds on the shot clock" theme and Schroyer's "either turn the ball over or get fouled and miss the foul shots" approaches did not work. Thus, my support for Dunlap.

By all accounts, Dunlap knows how to put a game plan together and his players are fundamentally sound. For me, reducing the turnover count by 10 and making free throws would be a great benchmark in year one, and I think Dunlap is the guy to bring that sort of progress. With a good recruit or two and an ability to polish up Dez and Amath's games - we have a good foundation. With a screen or two, perhaps Cruz would have a few more open looks from 3 land.

From there, we have got to start developing a bench. We have not had a solid rotation since McClain's run to the NCAA tourney - and if we are going to play up tempo and wear folks out in Laramie, we have to have more than a starting 5. To be fair to Kent, he is probably preferable to Dunlap in the recruiting department - so the bench might be better off with him...but if he can't develop the players he brings in, we don't gain anything.

 

[bladerunnr]

I have listened to Kent on some of the Pac 10 broadcasts this year. He is a good broadcaster and is engaging to listen to. His good teams have been great. His recruiting was sensational but I know that he lost support when Kevin Love went to Ucla instead of staying at home. He also took Oregon to 2 Nit final 4's. I wanted Gillespie but this guy has been a proven winner who has recruited future NBA'ers.

If it's true, I wouldn't be unhappy. He would be the equal of any coach in the MWC.

 

[Poke Around]

I was at Oregon 2002-2005. The Luke and Luke Show was some of the most fun I have ever had watching basketball. He is a hell of a recruiter and when he has the right players his teams are spectacular. His style of play could be awesome at altitude. With a few good signings and some results he could pack the AA.

The end of his tenure at Oregon was troubling. Part of his recruiting appeal was selling an image of a morally upstanding, Christian-oriented family atmosphere, and then he got caught cheating on his wife. I think he lost credibility with his players and recruits for that.

Bottom line is that there is some risk but we are talking about a coach who took a major conference program to the Elite Eight twice, in the last decade, five years apart (ie, with two totally different rosters), and is only 56. We could do a lot worse.

Ah heck, he was only cheating with college coeds. what's wrong with a fling in Mexico

 

[Poke Around]

I think there are several things you are overlooking:

1. Altman's last 4 seasons at Creighton featured a conference record of 47-25, one regular season championship, never lower than 4th, and postseason every year. It might not have been the peak of his tenure, but it was pretty impressive.

That was in the MVC. And he's not the only example of a coach that actually succeeds in more than one place.

2. Kent's last 4 seasons featured a conference record of 29--43. More damaging is that the last 3 years were 18-36 in conference play. This is at a job, that despite the historic lack of success, is now easily a top half job in its league (which Wyoming is not, especially now) due to the influence (even if perceived) of Nike. The facility investment, budgets, etc. put them in the top tier of the PAC-10, yet he couldn't win consistently. He had two-three really good years (01-02, 06-07, and 99-00), one conference title (02) and then a lot of mediocrity. His profile looks to have more in common with Steve McClain than Billy Gillispie. Keep in mind this isn't the ACC or Big East we are talking about, but rather a league (PAC-10) that has finished behind the MWC in RPI ratings on more than one occasion.

Not disputing that Kent's teams struggled at the end of his tenure. But that job was nothing before Kent took over - exactly one NCAA tourney appearance between 1961-2000. Really, Oregon's basketball tradition over that stretch probably wasn't even as strong as Wyoming's. Also, to compare McClain's resume at the time he was hired to Kent's now is laughable. McClain had never been a head coach above JuCo level.

3. Off the court issues. You never know what to believe, but Kent comes with some baggage (all of the recruiting rumors from the Hairston/Porter recruitment, the personal life issues, etc.). It might all be total crap, but it's out there.

I'm pretty sure that whatever connections to Worldwide Wes Kent had are no longer a factor. Personal life issues are there but they are also present with everyone's favorite candidate.

4. On a more personal level, I don't ever remember thinking Kent's teams looked particularly fundamentally sound. I saw a very loose style of ball with relatively high turnover rates. Good talent level (up until the last few years) and intensity (again, until the last few years), but not the consistent fundamental play that I would look for. If anything, I always thought Kent's program was a rich man's version of Steve McClain's. I could be wrong on this, but that's my perception and I know it is shared by others.

I think you are wrong about this. I attended a couple dozen Duck games in three years. He prefers his teams to get out in the open court and run, and that does produce higher turnover rates. But coaches who play uptempo can usually live with more turnovers, because it's a natural byproduct of that style of play. His halfcourt offense is considerably more sophisticated than the dribble-drive oriented offense McClain installed. McClain promised to play a running game as he was a Billy Tubbs disciple but his most successful teams didn't really rely on the fast break. Playing a fastbreak/secondary break style offense does not have to be mutually exclusive with "strong fundamentals."


Seriously, Cowboy Nation, answer me these two questions:

1. Who has Wyoming ever hired to coach men's basketball with a resume as strong as Ernie Kent's?
2. Who, besides Gillispie, is a realistically obtainable coach with a resume as strong as Ernie Kent's?

I fear we allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good around here a little too often.[/quote]

Sorry but we are looking for a coach, which should me an ability to coach. That's a strike against Kent, whose players never got better.

He was a good recruiter when he had World Wide Wes at his side, and when he had Knight's money from Nike. Knight's money dried up after a little event in Mexico that . ... well.

Who has a stronger resume than Kent? Try Dunlap and Shyatt and Dooley.

And if you don't believe the rumors about his off court antics maybe you should see if you can get copy of divorce papers and see why the wife told him to hit the road.