Analyzing the job Mick has done

[mplebanon]

The Good
I thought Mick was a great hire. Local boy comes home to coach here for his career. Program has continuity and doesn't have to do a coach search like Xavier does every 3 to 4 years.

Mick was considered a topnotch recruiter. For the most part, I think he's done a good job.

Program was in the crapper, and not many coaches would have taken the job, and followed what Huggins accomplished. He essentially lost 2 recruiting classes from the start due to Zimphers timing of her firing of Huggins. Not to mention, taking a knife to a gunfight as UC joined the Big East. Mick gets props for even taking the job.

Results have been pretty good. 2 Tournament appearances in a row. He lost to the eventual national champion UConn the first time, and gave it a good run last year.

Team defense has been a mainstay.

The Bad
I think the honeymoon period is over, with no one left to blame. Plenty of time to get the program back on it's feet, and he has with 2 NCAA Tournament appearances.

This season has brought to light some of the negatives still to be fixed.

Other than Yancy, Mick has failed to recruit the low post and get some offensive players down there. Hopefully Strickland changes that impression. And you could argue that the low post players don't seem to be coached very well.

I still think Mick has yet to recruit a true PG. For me, Cash was more of a SG playing PG. He did it as well as he could. We'll see how Caupain does.

You could argue that PG and a scoring PF/C are the two most important players on your team. And Mick hasn't exactly overly impressed in this department. Cash and Yancy did alright. Good at times, while leaving you questioning them alot of the other time.

This year's offense has really been atrocious. Whether it's just guys in position missing open shots, or the scheme, it's been simply atrocious. It's been 3 on 5 every game since we have no low post presence. And that failure is on Mick.

Another gripe is that we heard all preseason that this team would be 40 minutes of hell in terms of defensive pressure and more uptempo offensively, and it quickly went back to the boring, inept halfcourt offense that we all hate.

I think Mick has to upgrade his recruiting and his offensive scheme. Maybe better recruiting solves the offense simply by getting players that can score/finish. We shall see.

Conclusion
I'd give Mick a grade of B+. I think he needs a better influx of talent, namely in the low post, and should work on his offensive scheme as I previously said. In terms of his UC career so far........you have to consider what he started with, the conference he had to battle in at times shorthanded, the fact they made the tourney the last 2 years with a couple of good looking teams.......and also consider the future of conference affiliation is also a question mark which could hurt recruiting.

Mick still has alot of work to do. I'm mostly satisfied. I'm disappointed in this season, but otherwise satisfied.

 

[L-T]

The Good
I thought Mick was a great hire. Local boy comes home to coach here for his career. Program has continuity and doesn't have to do a coach search like Xavier does every 3 to 4 years.

Mick was considered a topnotch recruiter. For the most part, I think he's done a good job.

Program was in the crapper, and not many coaches would have taken the job, and followed what Huggins accomplished. He essentially lost 2 recruiting classes from the start due to Zimphers timing of her firing of Huggins. Not to mention, taking a knife to a gunfight as UC joined the Big East. Mick gets props for even taking the job.

Results have been pretty good. 2 Tournament appearances in a row. He lost to the eventual national champion UConn the first time, and gave it a good run last year.

Team defense has been a mainstay.

The Bad
I think the honeymoon period is over, with no one left to blame. Plenty of time to get the program back on it's feet, and he has with 2 NCAA Tournament appearances.

This season has brought to light some of the negatives still to be fixed.

Other than Yancy, Mick has failed to recruit the low post and get some offensive players down there. Hopefully Strickland changes that impression. And you could argue that the low post players don't seem to be coached very well.

I still think Mick has yet to recruit a true PG. For me, Cash was more of a SG playing PG. He did it as well as he could. We'll see how Caupain does.

You could argue that PG and a scoring PF/C are the two most important players on your team. And Mick hasn't exactly overly impressed in this department. Cash and Yancy did alright. Good at times, while leaving you questioning them alot of the other time.

This year's offense has really been atrocious. Whether it's just guys in position missing open shots, or the scheme, it's been simply atrocious. It's been 3 on 5 every game since we have no low post presence. And that failure is on Mick.

Another gripe is that we heard all preseason that this team would be 40 minutes of hell in terms of defensive pressure and more uptempo offensively, and it quickly went back to the boring, inept halfcourt offense that we all hate.

I think Mick has to upgrade his recruiting and his offensive scheme. Maybe better recruiting solves the offense simply by getting players that can score/finish. We shall see.

Conclusion
I'd give Mick a grade of B+. I think he needs a better influx of talent, namely in the low post, and should work on his offensive scheme as I previously said. In terms of his UC career so far........you have to consider what he started with, the conference he had to battle in at times shorthanded, the fact they made the tourney the last 2 years with a couple of good looking teams.......and also consider the future of conference affiliation is also a question mark which could hurt recruiting.

Mick still has alot of work to do. I'm mostly satisfied. I'm disappointed in this season, but otherwise satisfied.

From a "Macro" viewpoint, Mick's body of work looks pretty good. Started from Oblivion, built us methodically to a sweet 16 six years later. Grad rates have improved. Good defensive coach....etc.

It's when you look from a "Micro" viewpoint where things get cloudy and murky. His recruiting has not lived up to the reputation that preceded him. He primarily recruits 3 star players and projects, which is fine if the coach is known for developing players. Nothing he has done leads one to think he is making players massively better over 4 years. I don't need to discuss specific players, but in general, we don't see a lot of improvement in 4 years from his players. Therefore, in my opinion, his recruiting must get a lot better. These 3-star guys just aren't getting Big East ready fast enough.

Again, if we have lesser players, then we need a coach who can game plan and strategize to make the players successful. He seems to be able to do that defensively, but certainly not offensively. And, whatever coaching he is doing on inbounds plays just defies logic. I can't believe a coach can't come up with something to get the ball inbounds, much less score off of it occasionally.

Bottom line, he did something to pull us from the black hole post-Huggs and we're all grateful for the job he did. I just don't see a lot of the key ingredients necessary to make us an elite program on a consistent basis, and that is what we should demand. We can be that program, and we shouldn't accept anything less. I appreciated the job Rick Minter did for us. We were in the black hole when he took over as well, and he made us competitive and got us back in the bowl conversation, had some of the all-time best assistant coaches in here on our sidelines. But, is was apparent that he wasn't going to take our program to the next level, and we made a change. And, it proved to be a good decision.

I don't know if we're at that point with Mick, but we're getting closer. Taking a step back this year is not good. With graduation hitting us fairly hard, a return to what essentially is Conference USA next year, no huge offensive upgrade on the horizon, I'm hoping this step back doesn't become a 2, 3, or 4 yr. slide back into mediocrity.

 

[Scheids21]

He was 100% the right man for the job to rebuild the program. He has gotten us back to stable footing and basically our pre-collapse status. Who could have done a better job in 6 years? Maybe Tom Crean? It really cannot be debated how well he rebuilt the program.

The question now is whether he is the coach to take us from good to elite. I honestly don't know. I want a hometown coach to take us there and especially one who gave so much to rebuild it, so I truly hope he can do it. The next 4 years or so will tell us if he can get us there.

 

[UCBearcats]

From a "Macro" viewpoint, Mick's body of work looks pretty good. Started from Oblivion, built us methodically to a sweet 16 six years later. Grad rates have improved. Good defensive coach....etc.

It's when you look from a "Micro" viewpoint where things get cloudy and murky. His recruiting has not lived up to the reputation that preceded him. He primarily recruits 3 star players and projects, which is fine if the coach is known for developing players. Nothing he has done leads one to think he is making players massively better over 4 years. I don't need to discuss specific players, but in general, we don't see a lot of improvement in 4 years from his players. Therefore, in my opinion, his recruiting must get a lot better. These 3-star guys just aren't getting Big East ready fast enough.

Again, if we have lesser players, then we need a coach who can game plan and strategize to make the players successful. He seems to be able to do that defensively, but certainly not offensively. And, whatever coaching he is doing on inbounds plays just defies logic. I can't believe a coach can't come up with something to get the ball inbounds, much less score off of it occasionally.

Bottom line, he did something to pull us from the black hole post-Huggs and we're all grateful for the job he did. I just don't see a lot of the key ingredients necessary to make us an elite program on a consistent basis, and that is what we should demand. We can be that program, and we shouldn't accept anything less. I appreciated the job Rick Minter did for us. We were in the black hole when he took over as well, and he made us competitive and got us back in the bowl conversation, had some of the all-time best assistant coaches in here on our sidelines. But, is was apparent that he wasn't going to take our program to the next level, and we made a change. And, it proved to be a good decision.

I don't know if we're at that point with Mick, but we're getting closer. Taking a step back this year is not good. With graduation hitting us fairly hard, a return to what essentially is Conference USA next year, no huge offensive upgrade on the horizon, I'm hoping this step back doesn't become a 2, 3, or 4 yr. slide back into mediocrity.

Great post, I couldn't agree more.

 

[TheLongHaul]

I don't think Mick is the best coach in the world but I also don't think he is the worst. There are a lot of things that I don't really care for that he does. But for starters he is an alum that wants to be here and it isn't going to be easy to find a great coach if Mick were to leave. Second, UC is in an awkward spot right now with realignment and it's nice to have a coach that wants to be here. Third, at least on paper his best recruiting class is coming in next year. As long as his recruiting keeps getting better he'll look better as a coach. I think he'll still have issues but I don't expect this program to be a Duke type program.

 

[Scheids21]

I don't think Mick is the best coach in the world but I also don't think he is the worst. There are a lot of things that I don't really care for that he does. But for starters he is an alum that wants to be here and it isn't going to be easy to find a great coach if Mick were to leave. Second, UC is in an awkward spot right now with realignment and it's nice to have a coach that wants to be here. Third, at least on paper his best recruiting class is coming in next year. As long as his recruiting keeps getting better he'll look better as a coach. I think he'll still have issues but I don't expect this program to be a Duke type program.

Very well said. People need to be careful what they wish for if they want Mick gone. Right now, this job is not extremely desirable and if we lost Mick, odds are we would get an up and coming mid major coach. The wrong hire could set us back a decade. It is very nice (and often overlooked) to have a coach that you don't have to worry if he will leave. He is nowhere near the hot seat as well he shouldn't be. This 2013 class could be very special and I'm excited to see what he can do with them over the next 3 or 4 years.

 

[Bearcat04]

Very well said. People need to be careful what they wish for if they want Mick gone. Right now, this job is not extremely desirable and if we lost Mick, odds are we would get an up and coming mid major coach. The wrong hire could set us back a decade. It is very nice (and often overlooked) to have a coach that you don't have to worry if he will leave. He is nowhere near the hot seat as well he shouldn't be. This 2013 class could be very special and I'm excited to see what he can do with them over the next 3 or 4 years.

You and TheLongHaul both touched on why I think Mick is easily the right guy for the job. Given our small budget and conference realignment uncertainty, I think the chances are very slim that we could find a coach that could take us as far as Mick has (Sweet 16) that would also stick around. There will always be more money or a better situation somewhere else. The fact that Mick gets calls even though he has his dream job just goes to show how much more other schools have to offer.

I'd agree with a B+. Not great, but enough positives for me to believe that this can be a consistent, winning program.

 

[L-T]

I would have given him a B before this year, but I have him down to a B-/C+ based on what I've seen this year. There's a huge value however to be placed on having a coach that won't ever leave. But, he left once before and I'm not sure I'm believing he won't leave again. I just don't think his body of work has any top programs knocking his door down yet. It's a tough call with Mick for me. There's things I don't like about him, but then there are things I do like. I guess, for me, prior to this year, the good outweighed the bad. This season has really bummed me out, especially the pain from having to watch the absolute ineptitude we've shown over the last month and a half. So, I'm squarely on the fence and teetering toward the negative side right now. If we get stuck with an NIT bid, I'll fall into the bad side definitely. If we can at least salvage an NCAA bid, that will sustain me another year with the hope that the new recruits bring a different mojo to the team.

 

[nparker1]

I think a B would be a realistic grade for Cronin...this year has obviously hurt Mick's stock, but as far as i am concerned, i consider UC to be very fortunate to have a coach of Mick's level with true hometown and university loyalty...as Mick continues to gain experience and recognition, i believe (or at least hope) that he will gain more and more respect from fellow coaches, referees, fans, and most importantly his players...it has been mentioned by Mick, his staff, and national analysts that Mick is calling the right plays, but the players are not listening and not doing the plans like Mick has told them to do...as Mick gains more respect, I think the players will react more to his strategies/coaching...will Mick ever be a Pitino, a Self, or Williams?...i dont know...i do know that Mick has taken the right steps in positioning himself to be taught by 2 great coaches and he has devoted himself to the program...as i was on day 1, i am in full support of Cronin...

Side note: how much do you think Cronin could benefit from having a former pro on the sidelines as an assistant?...just looking at Ollie for UConn as an example...the players are going to automatically respond more because that assistant has been there before and succeeded...just a thought

Go Bearcats!

 

[CaptDale]

I would have given him a B before this year, but I have him down to a B-/C+ based on what I've seen this year. There's a huge value however to be placed on having a coach that won't ever leave. But, he left once before and I'm not sure I'm believing he won't leave again. I just don't think his body of work has any top programs knocking his door down yet. It's a tough call with Mick for me. There's things I don't like about him, but then there are things I do like. I guess, for me, prior to this year, the good outweighed the bad. This season has really bummed me out, especially the pain from having to watch the absolute ineptitude we've shown over the last month and a half. So, I'm squarely on the fence and teetering toward the negative side right now. If we get stuck with an NIT bid, I'll fall into the bad side definitely. If we can at least salvage an NCAA bid, that will sustain me another year with the hope that the new recruits bring a different mojo to the team.

The real question becomes: would you rather win the NIT or lose in the second round of the NCAA? (big assumptions on both ends of that question). As it stands now per Lunardi, we would play the Zags Round 2.

 

[Scheids21]

Always take the NCAA Tournament over the NIT. Period.

 

[TheLongHaul]

Always take the NCAA Tournament over the NIT. Period.

Yep. Shouldn't even need to be asked.

 

[L-T]

NCAA always preferable. Plus, the way we're playing now, I wouldn't look for us to advace very far in the NIT, so that would be a double-whammy. Give me the NCAA..under any senario.

 

[CaptDale]

NCAA always preferable. Plus, the way we're playing now, I wouldn't look for us to advace very far in the NIT, so that would be a double-whammy. Give me the NCAA..under any senario.

No, the question wasn't which would you prefer to play in. It was WIN the NIT Championship or play in the NCAA and get bumped in Round 2.

 

[bearcat4life]

I commend Cronin for the job he has done rebuilding the program. It was by far the worst program of all the power conferences and probably still in the discussion for worst overall. we move to the BE and get slaughtered the first 2-3 years under Cronin. he persevered and seems to have made us a tourney team pretty much every year. however, that is not going to satisfy me.

tourney 8/10 years if not higher
2nd round 6/10 years
sweet 16/ 4/10
elite 8 3/10
final 4 2/10
champs 1/10

this wont happen though until Cronin starts to emphasize offense more, whether that is recruiting it or coaching it. with the way college basketball is being played, we need scorers. I mean just look at the team that wins it all every year.....they have at least 1 guy that can get his shot at will. we need to start recruiting more 5 stars. I love guys like parker and Jackson and mbodj, you need them. but you cant have a whole team that starts all 3 of them and expect to make it to the 2nd weekend of the tourney

 

[Scheids21]

No, the question wasn't which would you prefer to play in. It was WIN the NIT Championship or play in the NCAA and get bumped in Round 2.

I understand the question. The answer is the same. I would rather lose first round in the NCAA than win the NIT.

 

[bearcat jeff]

The Good
I thought Mick was a great hire. Local boy comes home to coach here for his career. Program has continuity and doesn't have to do a coach search like Xavier does every 3 to 4 years.

Mick was considered a topnotch recruiter. For the most part, I think he's done a good job.

Program was in the crapper, and not many coaches would have taken the job, and followed what Huggins accomplished. He essentially lost 2 recruiting classes from the start due to Zimphers timing of her firing of Huggins. Not to mention, taking a knife to a gunfight as UC joined the Big East. Mick gets props for even taking the job.

Results have been pretty good. 2 Tournament appearances in a row. He lost to the eventual national champion UConn the first time, and gave it a good run last year.

Team defense has been a mainstay.

The Bad
I think the honeymoon period is over, with no one left to blame. Plenty of time to get the program back on it's feet, and he has with 2 NCAA Tournament appearances.

This season has brought to light some of the negatives still to be fixed.

Other than Yancy, Mick has failed to recruit the low post and get some offensive players down there. Hopefully Strickland changes that impression. And you could argue that the low post players don't seem to be coached very well.

I still think Mick has yet to recruit a true PG. For me, Cash was more of a SG playing PG. He did it as well as he could. We'll see how Caupain does.

You could argue that PG and a scoring PF/C are the two most important players on your team. And Mick hasn't exactly overly impressed in this department. Cash and Yancy did alright. Good at times, while leaving you questioning them alot of the other time.

This year's offense has really been atrocious. Whether it's just guys in position missing open shots, or the scheme, it's been simply atrocious. It's been 3 on 5 every game since we have no low post presence. And that failure is on Mick.

Another gripe is that we heard all preseason that this team would be 40 minutes of hell in terms of defensive pressure and more uptempo offensively, and it quickly went back to the boring, inept halfcourt offense that we all hate.

I think Mick has to upgrade his recruiting and his offensive scheme. Maybe better recruiting solves the offense simply by getting players that can score/finish. We shall see.

Conclusion
I'd give Mick a grade of B+. I think he needs a better influx of talent, namely in the low post, and should work on his offensive scheme as I previously said. In terms of his UC career so far........you have to consider what he started with, the conference he had to battle in at times shorthanded, the fact they made the tourney the last 2 years with a couple of good looking teams.......and also consider the future of conference affiliation is also a question mark which could hurt recruiting.

Mick still has alot of work to do. I'm mostly satisfied. I'm disappointed in this season, but otherwise satisfied.

Given what he started with, the facilities, athletic budget, urban campus, and beginning in the toughest basketball conference ever assembled, I agree on the B+.

Mick is one of the better defensive minded coaches in American. Offensively I'd like to see him change things up or change whoever on his staff is responsible for the offensive game plan.

Recruiting wise, you have to recruit basketball players and not just athletes with potential and upside. Gotta get some shooters to go along with those athletes, and intelligent guards who can penetrate and finish.

 

[L-T]

Again, a lot hinges on how this year plays out. If we take a step back to the NIT, it changes the whole perspective on Mick's body of work. We all recoginized that getting back to the NCAA Tournament would take some time, but once we got back, I think the expectation would be for us to stay at that level year-in and year-out. To make two dances and then fall back to the NIT, especally in a season where we have a veteran team and were ranked pretty high preseason, would be a shocking development, and would definitely tarnish Mick's body of work for me. We've already taken a fall in the Big East. We absolutely must finish strong now and keep from being relagated to the "losers" tournament. With Xavier's AD chairing the selection committee, I'm definitely nervous. He's had a first-hand view of our meltdown and all the media discussion of it, so we won't get any breaks. There's no choice but to finish strong and we'll see Mick's true value in how this plays out!

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

Again, a lot hinges on how this year plays out. If we take a step back to the NIT, it changes the whole perspective on Mick's body of work. We all recoginized that getting back to the NCAA Tournament would take some time, but once we got back, I think the expectation would be for us to stay at that level year-in and year-out. To make two dances and then fall back to the NIT, especally in a season where we have a veteran team and were ranked pretty high preseason, would be a shocking development, and would definitely tarnish Mick's body of work for me. We've already taken a fall in the Big East. We absolutely must finish strong now and keep from being relagated to the "losers" tournament. With Xavier's AD chairing the selection committee, I'm definitely nervous. He's had a first-hand view of our meltdown and all the media discussion of it, so we won't get any breaks. There's no choice but to finish strong and we'll see Mick's true value in how this plays out!

We are in the NCAA tourney. 21 wins and after a win Sat. 500 in BE. No doubt we are in.

 

[BearcatMick]

Mick has done an A+ job. Really impressed how he turned the program back around despite the Huggins sympathizers and radio shock jocks calling for his head. Lance Mcalister after the loss to DePaul in the big east tourney wanted him gone and screamed like a lunatic.