Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
Really? Is ESPN paying him what he'd get coaching? I'm sure he's paid well, but I doubt it's 7 figures.
So money ain't it..
|
So the only thing you've ever thought about when considering a job offer is the salary? No considerations at all to quality of life? Lavin probably gets a not-too-shabby six figures to talk about basketball. No recruiting necessary, no boosters to deal with, no sleepless nights wondering what might have been if you'd defended the final out-of-bounds play differently. Presuming he has a family, which job do you think they would prefer he work?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
Do you think he just wanted to quit coaching? That's the only plausible explanation I can think of aside from the theory that no one wants him..
|
A. Please point to where I argued that he wanted to quit coaching. He knows he was fired. You know he was fired. I know he was fired. Who are you arguing with here?
B. I can name five coaches in the most prestigious basketball conference in the country who couldn't carry Lavin's water. So, um, no, "because no one wants him" doesn't come close to explaining things. You think no one would want Steve Mariucci to be their coach? You think Hubie Brown's been calling NBA games forever because he couldn't get hired? Geez.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
Looks like he was UCLA's version of Tom Davis. Did great with the recruits he inherited, but plateaued after that. That makes him good, not great.
Now, this is just a surface examination of a coach who's had one head coaching job.
|
Again, who are you arguing with? No one in this thread has written that Lavin was "great" as a coach. I weighed in when people made the leap from Steve Lavin, misinformed officiating analyst, to Steve Lavin, weak basketball coach. And he did things well for long enough that you can't just dismiss him as someone who was only able to succeed with someone else's recruits.
Your examination is indeed surface-level.