Happy we have Mick

[Amberlycolonel]

To even compare Cronin's coaching ability to Huggins' is laughable at best. Give both a team of equal talent and Huggins wins 70% of the time. I will leave it at that. I will give Cronin the credit he deserves however for the rebuilding job he has done and I do not miss the constant drama under Huggins. That was ages ago however. Now it is time to stand on his own as a "coach" and not as a perceived "savior".

 

[JumpinJack5]

To even compare Cronin's coaching ability to Huggins' is laughable at best. Give both a team of equal talent and Huggins wins 70% of the time. I will leave it at that. I will give Cronin the credit he deserves however for the rebuilding job he has done and I do not miss the constant drama under Huggins. That was ages ago however. Now it is time to stand on his own as a "coach" and not as a perceived "savior".

Why, Cronin's teams look exactly like Huggs teams did. Both coaches heavily emphasize defense, both have teams that play to the level of their competition, both were/are consistent winners. Huggs has done it for much longer, but Cronin pretty much uses the same formula that Huggs used, minus the character issues. Huggs is probably a little bit better than Mick offensively, but they both have similar coaching styles and have yielded pretty good results.

 

[Amberlycolonel]

Why, Cronin's teams look exactly like Huggs teams did. Both coaches heavily emphasize defense, both have teams that play to the level of their competition, both were/are consistent winners. Huggs has done it for much longer, but Cronin pretty much uses the same formula that Huggs used, minus the character issues. Huggs is probably a little bit better than Mick offensively, but they both have similar coaching styles and have yielded pretty good results.

I will go along with most of that.

 

[ready2go]

Why, Cronin's teams look exactly like Huggs teams did. Both coaches heavily emphasize defense, both have teams that play to the level of their competition, both were/are consistent winners. Huggs has done it for much longer, but Cronin pretty much uses the same formula that Huggs used, minus the character issues. Huggs is probably a little bit better than Mick offensively, but they both have similar coaching styles and have yielded pretty good results.

To add to that...

Huggins always recruited pieces to the puzzle.

We always had a pure shooter (Burton, Durden, Baker, Williams x2). We always had a true PG (Logan, Satterfield, Exel). We always had a post presence (Martin x2, Hicks, Max, Little, Fortson). And a slasher/highflyer (Flynt, Levett, McCelroy, White)

 

[JumpinJack5]

To add to that...

Huggins always recruited pieces to the puzzle.

We always had a pure shooter (Burton, Durden, Baker, Williams x2). We always had a true PG (Logan, Satterfield, Exel). We always had a post presence (Martin x2, Hicks, Max, Little, Fortson). And a slasher/highflyer (Flynt, Levett, McCelroy, White)

Huggins developed those players, he needed others to help them get on campus. They didn't magically step foot on campus and dominate. Cronin has done a good job with the guards, but the criticism of his development of bigs is well-deserved.

 

[JasonS]

To add to that...

Huggins always recruited pieces to the puzzle.

We always had a pure shooter (Burton, Durden, Baker, Williams x2). We always had a true PG (Logan, Satterfield, Exel). We always had a post presence (Martin x2, Hicks, Max, Little, Fortson). And a slasher/highflyer (Flynt, Levett, McCelroy, White)

None of those PGs you mentioned were true PGs. Satterfield was the closest to that but he was still more of a scoring point (or at least he wanted to be) than a facilitator. Logan was a SG who handled the ball and so was Van Exel if we are being honest.

 

[JasonS]

None of those PGs you mentioned were true PGs. Satterfield was the closest to that but he was still more of a scoring point (or at least he wanted to be) than a facilitator. Logan was a SG who handled the ball and so was Van Exel if we are being honest.

Also, James White was a transfer not a recruit.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

To add to that...

Huggins always recruited pieces to the puzzle.

We always had a pure shooter (Burton, Durden, Baker, Williams x2). We always had a true PG (Logan, Satterfield, Exel). We always had a post presence (Martin x2, Hicks, Max, Little, Fortson). And a slasher/highflyer (Flynt, Levett, McCelroy, White)

Cronin was the recruiter who wanted a pure shooter on the team. He got Field here and did the same thing at Louisville getting Francisco Garcia.

 

[westsidecat]

Why, Cronin's teams look exactly like Huggs teams

no way. let me know when cronin gets a number 1 overall seed for the dance. let me know when mick puts more then 1 player in the league in 7 years. hell there still more huggs cats playing right now even after 7 years with mick. let me know when mick keeps a team in the top 10 for more then a week. let me know when just one of the talking heads say they like uc to cut the nets down.

to say cronin teams mirror huggs squad is just disrespectful to all those who played for a power program and a coach who built it. regardless if you like how he did it or not(ftr i didn't)

it's a night and day diffrent in all aspects of the game.

 

[JackBauer151]

no way. let me know when cronin gets a number 1 overall seed for the dance. let me know when mick puts more then 1 player in the league in 7 years. hell there still more huggs cats playing right now even after 7 years with mick. let me know when mick keeps a team in the top 10 for more then a week. let me know when just one of the talking heads say they like uc to cut the nets down.

to say cronin teams mirror huggs squad is just disrespectful to all those who played for a power program and a coach who built it. regardless if you like how he did it or not(ftr i didn't)

it's a night and day diffrent in all aspects of the game.

It's amazing to me that we have all gone over this a million times on this board and there are still people who lack the perspective of what Mick walked into. His first 3-4 years here were a wash. Completely out of his control where he had 0 players and had to rebuild a program from scratch. Not gonna gave a very good team or very good players for a while. So when you emphatically say 7 years like its some huge eye sore compared to huggins it's just disingenuous to the argument. Oh and the talking heads were talking about the Cats going to the final four last year. They were obviously very wrong about that but that was the perception of a mick cronin team early last year. I hate this debate. I think it is comparing apples to oranges. The only real thing Huggs and Cronin have in common is the school they coached at. They have done it in different era's, different leagues, different AD's, different challenges, and different circumstances. Huggins is a HOF coach with the sun setting on his career. Mick is just beginning. The records are obviously going to be different. Mick also had his start significantly stalled by the death penalty given to the program. I am extremely grateful to Huggs for all his accomplishments here at UC. The wins, the players, the memories, and the program he helped raise back to national prominence. Im looking forward to saying the same thing about Mick when his tenure is done at UC. The debate, in my opinion, is a dumb one. To put down the current coach by comparing his record to old one is not a fair comparison because the circumstances are completely different.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

It's amazing to me that we have all gone over this a million times on this board and there are still people who lack the perspective of what Mick walked into. His first 3-4 years here were a wash. Completely out of his control where he had 0 players and had to rebuild a program from scratch. Not gonna gave a very good team or very good players for a while. So when you emphatically say 7 years like its some huge eye sore compared to huggins it's just disingenuous to the argument. Oh and the talking heads were talking about the Cats going to the final four last year. They were obviously very wrong about that but that was the perception of a mick cronin team early last year. I hate this debate. I think it is comparing apples to oranges. The only real thing Huggs and Cronin have in common is the school they coached at. They have done it in different era's, different leagues, different AD's, different challenges, and different circumstances. Huggins is a HOF coach with the sun setting on his career. Mick is just beginning. The records are obviously going to be different. Mick also had his start significantly stalled by the death penalty given to the program. I am extremely grateful to Huggs for all his accomplishments here at UC. The wins, the players, the memories, and the program he helped raise back to national prominence. Im looking forward to saying the same thing about Mick when his tenure is done at UC. The debate, in my opinion, is a dumb one. To put down the current coach by comparing his record to old one is not a fair comparison because the circumstances are completely different.

Jack absolutely the very best comment ever posted on this site. Agree 1000 percent.

 

[JumpinJack5]

no way. let me know when cronin gets a number 1 overall seed for the dance. let me know when mick puts more then 1 player in the league in 7 years. hell there still more huggs cats playing right now even after 7 years with mick. let me know when mick keeps a team in the top 10 for more then a week. let me know when just one of the talking heads say they like uc to cut the nets down.

to say cronin teams mirror huggs squad is just disrespectful to all those who played for a power program and a coach who built it. regardless if you like how he did it or not(ftr i didn't)

it's a night and day diffrent in all aspects of the game.

Like JackBauer said, the first 3-4 years were a wash for Mick. I wouldn't be surprised in a few years to see this team ranked pretty high, Mick now has the talent he needs. Also, Mick has been much better at not taking lots of chances on poor character, his only real gamble was Lance Stephenson. If he took chances on highly ranked, poor character guys, we would have more guys in the NBA, but then our program would look pretty similar to what Xavier went through last year. How can you not see similarities? Im not saying Mick has reached Huggs level, but the way their teams play is very similar. They play hard, they sometimes struggle against lesser competition and play great against good competition, defense is the number 1 priority, both like to find diamonds in the rough when recruiting, etc. I can definitely see the resemblance, you can tell Mick coached under Huggs. While Huggs has proved himself more than Mick, Mick is well on his way to becoming a big figure in UC basketball history.

 

[ready2go]

Cronin was the recruiter who wanted a pure shooter on the team. He got Field here and did the same thing at Louisville getting Francisco Garcia.

You're right,

The HC of team has nothing to do with getting recruits. Give me a friggin break. Huggs had shooters on this team when Mick was still in diapers

As for true PG, then Moore, Barker, Horton. Oh and Jihad!!

 

[david aka the TYZ]

It's amazing to me that we have all gone over this a million times on this board and there are still people who lack the perspective of what Mick walked into. His first 3-4 years here were a wash. Completely out of his control where he had 0 players and had to rebuild a program from scratch. Not gonna gave a very good team or very good players for a while. So when you emphatically say 7 years like its some huge eye sore compared to huggins it's just disingenuous to the argument. Oh and the talking heads were talking about the Cats going to the final four last year. They were obviously very wrong about that but that was the perception of a mick cronin team early last year. I hate this debate. I think it is comparing apples to oranges. The only real thing Huggs and Cronin have in common is the school they coached at. They have done it in different era's, different leagues, different AD's, different challenges, and different circumstances. Huggins is a HOF coach with the sun setting on his career. Mick is just beginning. The records are obviously going to be different. Mick also had his start significantly stalled by the death penalty given to the program. I am extremely grateful to Huggs for all his accomplishments here at UC. The wins, the players, the memories, and the program he helped raise back to national prominence. Im looking forward to saying the same thing about Mick when his tenure is done at UC. The debate, in my opinion, is a dumb one. To put down the current coach by comparing his record to old one is not a fair comparison because the circumstances are completely different.

Well said and I agree.

 

[Gotcha23]

It's amazing to me that we have all gone over this a million times on this board and there are still people who lack the perspective of what Mick walked into. His first 3-4 years here were a wash. Completely out of his control where he had 0 players and had to rebuild a program from scratch. Not gonna gave a very good team or very good players for a while. So when you emphatically say 7 years like its some huge eye sore compared to huggins it's just disingenuous to the argument. Oh and the talking heads were talking about the Cats going to the final four last year. They were obviously very wrong about that but that was the perception of a mick cronin team early last year. I hate this debate. I think it is comparing apples to oranges. The only real thing Huggs and Cronin have in common is the school they coached at. They have done it in different era's, different leagues, different AD's, different challenges, and different circumstances. Huggins is a HOF coach with the sun setting on his career. Mick is just beginning. The records are obviously going to be different. Mick also had his start significantly stalled by the death penalty given to the program. I am extremely grateful to Huggs for all his accomplishments here at UC. The wins, the players, the memories, and the program he helped raise back to national prominence. Im looking forward to saying the same thing about Mick when his tenure is done at UC. The debate, in my opinion, is a dumb one. To put down the current coach by comparing his record to old one is not a fair comparison because the circumstances are completely different.

He did push Abdul Herrera and Downey out though didn't he? Could have made rebuilding years faster.

 

[JackBauer151]

He did push Abdul Herrera and Downey out though didn't he? Could have made rebuilding years faster.

I dont know if this is sarcastic or not. Downey left on his own accord and with good reason. You have no team and the two coaches who recruited you are gone. No reason to stay. As for Herrera he went juco and then went on to avg 4 minutes a game at kansas state. Not sure his staying would have any difference.

 

[TheLongHaul]

He did push Abdul Herrera and Downey out though didn't he? Could have made rebuilding years faster.

Herrera (nor Downey for that matter) was not pushed out by Cronin.

 

[Gotcha23]

Herrera (nor Downey for that matter) was not pushed out by Cronin.

I might just remember that wrong. I thought I heard Mick didn't want Downey because something happened and Herrera was 6-11 270..we could have used him IMO. I guess Adam H. was a better starter, come on people.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

I might just remember that wrong. I thought I heard Mick didn't want Downey because something happened and Herrera was 6-11 270..we could have used him IMO. I guess Adam H. was a better starter, come on people.

Come on people!!!! You heard Mick didn't want Downey. From who???? Herrera went to JUCO. No way Mick pushed Downey out the door. Mick tried to convince him to stay but Devin chose another option. Why would a player of his ability want to play for a young Coach , who's team had very little talent. Downey was recruited when the program was gong in a whole different dirrection. When Huggins was forced out and kennedy wasn't rehired it made his decision much easier. He left but not because Mick didn't want him.

 

[UCalum08]

Come on people!!!! You heard Mick didn't want Downey. From who???? Herrera went to JUCO. No way Mick pushed Downey out the door. Mick tried to convince him to stay but Devin chose another option. Why would a player of his ability want to play for a young Coach , who's team had very little talent. Downey was recruited when the program was gong in a whole different dirrection. When Huggins was forced out and kennedy wasn't rehired it made his decision much easier. He left but not because Mick didn't want him.

No doubt. Downey went to SC to play in his home state and be closer to family. Once AK wasn't the coach it was an easy decision. I thought Herrera had NCAA eligibility problems too.