Mick Cronin

[cincrulz11]

Originally Posted by Hogsack

This has nothing to do with whether or not the Bearcat fan base is delusional! Mick isn't basing his decision on the opinions of people on this board....so why attack everyone?
The fact is that the stars have aligned perfectly for him. One of the most prestigious programs in the history of the sport has an opening that, for whatever reason, nobody seems to want. This is a chance for Mick to "out kick his coverage" and he'd be an idiot to pass up the opportunity. But don't get pissed off at everyone else if he makes the decision to leave.

dont pay any attention to that guy, all his does is make comments like that to anybody that doesn't worship mick.

[sedziobs]

Originally Posted by waterhead

You make a good point but I would just point to one thing. If you have enough data to suggest there is a pattern (9 years) you don't have to look at individual games to see what went wrong. The pattern tells me it could be more of a system thing and not just the chaos of the tourney.

In Cronin's tenure we have 1 upset and have been upset 3 times. The rest have gone as seeded. I don't think that's enough data to draw a conclusion based on those results alone. Last year is the only real outlier.

For me, Kenpom remains the best measuring stick. If we are outside the top 30-40 teams multiple years running, then it's time to look at other options since I think we should expect to be a top 30 program. We can hope to be a top 15-20 program, but I don't think we should expect it.

[cincyalum2014]

Think Jamie Dixon will be announced the head coach of UCLA will be announced by the end of that day

[waterhead]

Originally Posted by cincrulz11

Pete Thamel of Yahoo Sports nailed it with Mick. Everybody can debate about whether this is the best cincinnati can hope for but I think this is an accurate description of Mick


"Cincinnati's Mick Cronin has established himself as one of the country's most consistent coaches, but his style makes Ben Howland's look like the Showtime Lakers. Cronin is one of the country's most consistent coaches, as he's reached nine consecutive NCAA tournaments at Cincinnati. He's low ego and easy to work with, which would be a huge upgrade. But his teams have all fit a pattern of consistently exiting the NCAA tournament early. He's got a 6-11 overall NCAA tournament record - including two dances at Murray State - and just one Round of 16. To project Cronin as a bad hire would be foolish, as he's won 67 percent of his games at Cincinnati (296-147). But there's a reason why he's a backup candidate: The flaws are real."

I think it's a solid opinion but it probably lacks some further insight. I mean what do we think Mick could do with 4 and 5 star talent when he does very good things with 3 star talent? The only thing he has lacked over the years are actual basketball players. If he can get basketball players who are also athletes that fit his defensive system? Even if all he recruits are 4 star guys and not the one and doners. A team full of SK, Gates, Evans, Cumberland, Clark, Curtis, Johnson, types? We get about 1 of those per year. What if he got 3 of those per year?

[waterhead]

Originally Posted by sedziobs

In Cronin's tenure we have 1 upset and have been upset 3 times. The rest have gone as seeded. I don't think that's enough data to draw a conclusion based on those results alone. Last year is the only real outlier.

For me, Kenpom remains the best measuring stick. If we are outside the top 30-40 teams multiple years running, then it's time to look at other options since I think we should expect to be a top 30 program. We can hope to be a top 15-20 program, but I don't think we should expect it.

I get what you are saying...but my conclusion is we don't have enough basketball players in March to advance. It's not about his March coaching necessarily...it's more about recruiting. 5-10 seeds are not going to get you F4's very often. We need basketball players to get protected seeds or to advance.

So my proposal is to skip the athlete project recruit or the 3-4 star guys with multiple offensive deficiencies and get basketball players who know how to score even if they aren't top notch athletes. Play makers and shooters instead. Coach them up on D and see what happens. His D system can probably work very well with just about anyone provided they aren't flat footed and slug like. SK and Cumberland are prime examples. I think the system needs bigs who can move and jump...but outside of that we need guys who can score and shoot.

Or just infuse a grad transfer to help in areas of need

[TheRealUC]

Originally Posted by sedziobs

Tennessee blew a 25 point lead against Iowa, and then rallied from 18 down in the second half the very next game against Purdue. That's two consecutive "fiascos" that can never be explained.

Auburn is in the final four, but would have been out in the first round if New Mexico St makes their free throws at the end of the game. Is it because their fans demanded a win? Of course not.

My point is that basketball is chaotic and unpredictable, which is what makes it exciting. Changing coaches isn't going to do anything about that.

Bingo

[TheRealUC]

Originally Posted by cincycpaw

Iowa was 1-5 in their last 6 including 20 point losses to Ohio State, Wisconsin and Michigan and a 14 point loss to Rutgers. That game in the NCAA should be used against Mick.

The season was very good. The ending, again, was not. I don’t think expecting the Bearcats to make the sweet 16 every 4 years or so is too much to ask from this coach.

So you're using a 6 game sample out of 30+ games, 2 of which their coach was suspended for, to diminish a good basketball team and hold it over Cronin's head....got it.

P.S. Look at how we limped into the conference tournament. I guess the teams that lost to us should be embarrassed as well.

[TheRealUC]

Originally Posted by waterhead

The pattern tells me it could be more of a system thing and not just the chaos of the tourney.

Sorry for the string of posts, but this is a decent point. I think our system tends to leave more vulnerable to the chaos that is the tournament. I'll agree to that.

[Jon Rycek]

Originally Posted by waterhead

S16 would be a good first step...but it doesn't really get me charged up nor does it get to the heart of the problem. We have only been seeded 1 time to suggest we should even make it to the S16. That was our 2 seed. The problem in my eyes is not really the March results so much as it is the fact that we enter the tourney as pretenders most years and not contenders. You can't expect F4 runs from teams in the 5-10 seed range even though it would be nice to exceed the seeding expectations every once in a while.

We need more teams like Gary's Sr year where it all comes together. 1 of those every 4 years would be nice. I could live with that. At least we had reason to expect a run that year. Most years we don't have that type of expectations other than getting luck of the draw and great matchups.

I’m confused as to what point your making. You say our lack of tournament success is a pattern at this point. But then you admit our seeding hasn’t been that of making a sweet 16+ run. Other than that terrible loss to nevada, which I still don’t put on the shoulders of Cronin as much as I do the people actually playing the game. But fans will be fans. We upset a 3 seed and made one sweet 16. It took Mick what, 5 years just to get us tourney ready, so discount those years. You want a sweet 16 every four years or a team that can make one, well we should have that next season, and should have made it last season if it wasn’t for the previously stated fiasco. People keep saying 1 sweet sixteen in 13 season, we’ll four of those were a huge rebuilding. So in 9 years, we’ve had one run, and one that should have been, and possibly another next season. That’s 3 good teams in ten years. Sounds exactly what you’re asking for? So what’s the issue

[Jon Rycek]

Originally Posted by cincrulz11

Pete Thamel of Yahoo Sports nailed it with Mick. Everybody can debate about whether this is the best cincinnati can hope for but I think this is an accurate description of Mick


"Cincinnati's Mick Cronin has established himself as one of the country's most consistent coaches, but his style makes Ben Howland's look like the Showtime Lakers. Cronin is one of the country's most consistent coaches, as he's reached nine consecutive NCAA tournaments at Cincinnati. He's low ego and easy to work with, which would be a huge upgrade. But his teams have all fit a pattern of consistently exiting the NCAA tournament early. He's got a 6-11 overall NCAA tournament record - including two dances at Murray State - and just one Round of 16. To project Cronin as a bad hire would be foolish, as he's won 67 percent of his games at Cincinnati (296-147). But there's a reason why he's a backup candidate: The flaws are real."

This is not a good statement at all. In this case Tony Bennet would just be a back up option. Since when is playing highlight reel basketball make you a good coach?