Let's say Frank is sent on his way at the end of the year, how would y'all feel about Chris Mack as our next MBB coach? Yay or Nay and why?
Chris Mack
- Thread starter ScWildthing61
- Start date
Muschamp 2.0. If you can't win with every advantage (Louisville), how are you going to win at USC?
He also has NCAA issues he's still dealing with at Louisville.
He also has NCAA issues he's still dealing with at Louisville.
He's not bad. We all have our preferences. It's been a struggle for him this year, but he is usually good to get you in the tournament and maybe win a game. We could do worse.
Edit: I see why you brought up his name now. He just got let go by Louisville.
Stay away from Mack. UL fans hate him. He is not our answer to men’s basketball.
I hate that he’s struggled (relatively speaking) at L’ville. Years ago, I decided to install the pack line defense on the team I coach. I wasn’t satisfied with the initial results, did a little research, and ended up buying Chris Mack’s pack line install and drills video. I thought he came off as a great teacher with an engaging personality. I started paying more attention to his Xavier teams and thought he would be a great guy to coach USC.
What has happened to Mack at Louisville is why hiring a coach that I think can get local buy-in is important. Mack is a good coach. Xavier is probably a Top 5 Mid-major program in the country. He got Xavier in the tournament 8 of 9 years. For whatever reason, he just wasn't a fit in Louisville. That is why I have been adamantly against the notion of just plugging in a coach with a good record if our job comes open. We need to think about how a new coach would fit with the local basketball community.
That is the key to it all. And hope we have the people that are doing the hiring to know who fits. They ought to. It’s their job. Every coach that interviews does the same - asking themselves “Is this place the right fit for me?”
I did not know Louisville let Mack go. Wonder who they’ll go after?
If you don’t like Mack, or you have a problem with him, how the he!! could you want Pitino?
Fit is important in any coaching situation. If it's wrong, you're dead wherever you go and whatever you've done previously. I think about poor old Gene Bartow leaving Memphis State for UCLA when Wooden retired. Bartow would have had his work cut out for him anyway, but he just didn't fit in out there. On the other hand, Denny Crum left the staff at UCLA to take the Louisville job and had a very nice run, a great run. He fit.
Huge, huge fan (with certain qualifiers, of course).
The Cons: It takes time to learn, and more time to stay on top of it. If you coach a sub-varsity team, you may be stressed when you realize you need to spend at least 20 minutes of practice every day on pack-line drills. With zone defense, you can teach it, review it throughout the season, and drill it once a week, spending practice time on other areas.
You need kids who are mentally ready for this kind of defense. First a lot of new players, the idea of adjusting your personal responsibilities based on where the ball is, where the player you are responsible for, and what your help duties are can be overwhelming. I was lucky that in my first year with the defense I had a smart group of 8th graders and a large, bright group of 7th graders. We did pretty well with it the first year. (Finished 13-2, gave up about 19 ppg…good for first in our league by about 3 ppg) By year two, the kids knew the defense as well as I did. (17-0, 14 ppg)
The Pros: At levels where offensive players aren’t going to be super-skilled or brilliant shooters, the pack line can be really tough to play against. I love that it allows so much on-ball pressure without the defender being too stressed about some penetration (because of the level of help being given). One thing about the pack line that I’ve though would help the Gamecocks (post-final four run…until then, their defense was stellar)…packline removes the incredibly difficult off-ball task of “deny➡️Help➡️Recover.” It takes a lot of discipline and athleticism to deny a wing pass, then help on penetration and THEN recover to your man when the ball is passed. Pack line has kids focus on just “help” and “recover”.
I was wondering about this - who made this decision? There’s no one really in charge at the moment - seems a strange time (because of that and because it’s mid-season) to be negotiating the parting of ways with a $4M a year employee.
Makes sense. Its interesting to think we have inherit advantages in basketball that are not there in football. The state produces a good level of talent...the challenge is keeping them home. And with the right coach and direction for our program, we really wouldn't face too much recruiting pressure from Clempson because they literally don't care about basketball. I dont think the ACC is near the bball recruiting advantage it used to be. Duke is the only ACC ranked in the latest top 25. The SEC has 4 and Texas and OU could be quality additions to SEC mens basketball. The ACC is in real danger of being left behind. UNC, UVA and Louisville are all down. Heck, Miami is tied for first in the ACC.
The state produces a good level of talent?
Maybe in the past. What is a “good level”? Ten P5 level players a year? It ain’t happening.
Maybe in the past. What is a “good level”? Ten P5 level players a year? It ain’t happening.
My guess is Mack will likely be back to his successful ways.
Louisville surely has great program tradition but currently as others have mentioned it’s a mess there. He stepped into a mess and hasn’t been able to get out of it.
Not saying he’d be the guy if we had an opening but if he was available we should certainly talk to him if we had an opening
Louisville surely has great program tradition but currently as others have mentioned it’s a mess there. He stepped into a mess and hasn’t been able to get out of it.
Not saying he’d be the guy if we had an opening but if he was available we should certainly talk to him if we had an opening
I definitely think he gets back somewhere - and given the right circumstances he could be successful. But his time at Xavier was a bit of an anomaly. Xavier was an absolute buzzsaw when he took over. He was a big part of that as an assistant, so he knew the road map of how to keep it going well. But walking into a tailor-made situation that is set up for success doesn't really give much insight as to how well they can build a program.
He does get a ton of credit for keeping it going up at Xavier though (it's never a given when there's a change at the top, no matter how well the new guy knows the system). But in his first three years of recruiting at Louisville he got 1 five-star recruit and 10 four-star recruits (his class rankings were 6, 53, and 11 - the 53 he only had two spots to fill, both four-star kids). And his teams got worse in an ACC that's been gradually getting worse. Sorry, but with that talent you should be able to field a decent team and be a program that is on the rise, not the decline.
What would he do at USC when he could get half the talent in a conference that starting to look twice as hard?
Isn't there an NCAA investigation going on right now at Louisville? I know Mack was suspended for 6 games last year and they fired him this year. Did something else come up or are they trying to placate the NCAA in advance?
If we won't hire Sean Miller due to an NCAA investigation I don't see us hiring Chris Mack.
If we won't hire Sean Miller due to an NCAA investigation I don't see us hiring Chris Mack.
Tony Bennett is the king of the pack line. I like the defense, but like any defense you have to have total buy in. Much respect if you’re still trying to teach man to man in todays game. So much matchup zone.
Mack out at Louisville: 'You've gotta win games'
As part of his negotiated separation agreement with the University of Louisville, men's basketball coach Chris Mack will receive a $4.8 million buyout, sources told ESPN. Associate head coach Mike Pegues has been named interim coach.
It is worth noting that Xavier is only 100 miles from Louisville. He had pretty good ties to the area. That’s about the same distance from Charleston to Columbia.
I think this is more of a lesson that success at a mid major doesn’t guarantee success as a major. Shaka Smart seems to be a pretty good comparison. Success at VCU and seems to be doing well at Marquette. Couldn’t get Texas anywhere near the same level.
While true, Shaka was building Texas nicely but were just upset in the tourney by Abilene-Christian. No shame in that, a lot get snake bitten there.
They were top 25 his last 3 seasons and top 5 Big XII tourney champ before the upset and him walking. With that fan base, I don’t blame him.
Also of note, it takes a little longer to build when facing much tougher SOS as a major, especially that conference.
The problem was that Texas didn’t need to be built. They just went to the tourney 16 out of the previous 17 seasons under the coach they fired for not being good enough (and they won 20+ games in 15 of those 17 years). Then Shaka proceeded to miss the tourney 3 times in six seasons and only won 20 games twice in those six seasons. He was a failure in comparison to his predecessor.
Shaka is a mid-major coach because he’s obsessed with his havoc system. And it’s a system that works on the mid-major level because it exploits teams that don’t have many ball-handlers - power 5 teams always have enough to break the press.
By the way, has there ever been a worse combo of firing coaches than Mack Brown and Rick Barnes being let go within a couple of years of each other? Texas got caught up in their own hubris (and their Longhorn network) and thought they could just snap their fingers and bring in coaches that would win even more than their greatest basketball coach of all time and their second greatest football coach of all time. And ever since they’ve been garbage in both. I love it.
I finally ditched the packline and man to man altogether. After that first group of kids moved on, I switched to a zone that let us do what I liked about the pack line, but of course was much, much easier for them to learn.
Agreed, Texas “fixed” what was not broken and I laugh at them every time they lose. But in Shaka’s case, it was his first major job and of course there is a learning curve and getting his style of players. However, he was starting to make it work and building some great momentum. Texas then, yet again, stepped on their D’s.
You make a great point about the skills-tree that comes with a M2M defense. I thought those kids learned a lot of concepts that translated to both ends of the floor as they started to really understand our M2M and the rules that went with it.
While Texas went to the tournament under Barnes what was the difference between he and Smart. They make the tournament most of the time and get upset. Barnes was a tease at Texas. He always had you think his teams would do something only to lose on the first weekend. Couldn’t win with LaMarcus Aldridge and Avery Bradley. Couldn’t even make a deep run with Kevin Durant. The NBA is littered with guys that played under Barnes at Texas only to have a string of Round of 32 exits.
Xavier is no mid-major anymore and if it were the success of Ned Wulk, Skip Prosser, Thad Matta and Sean Miller after they left the Musketeers would show that your concern over mid-major coaches is not grounded in facts
Dude get off your high horse. I don’t know what your personal grind is but you’re being a douche bag. I can rattle off names of coaches from mid majors like Darrin Horn, Steve Newton, Tom Crean and others that were “mid major coaches” that couldn’t get it done at a higher level. Those are facts too.
Mid-majors are teams from conferences that, generally, are in the top division of college basketball but don't play major-college football.
But I guess you’re going to hammer me with facts about how awesome Xavier football is next.
This is true - Texas had many disappointing exits from the tourney during Barnes’ time there. But to leave early, you have to be there in the first place. It’s not like he squandered talent like Crean just did a couple of years ago with Anthony Edwards and had a losing record while coaching the best player in the ncaa. Barnes was a victim of his own success. He won too much, but never won it all. One Final Four, Two Elite 8's, Two Sweet 16's and a slew of first round victories. It's not Coach K material, but the dude has gone to the tourney 25 times in 35 years as a coach and he's about to make it 26 in 36. And Texas fired him because he wasn't good enough for them.
The problem with Texas they thought they were too big to fail. They thought Mack Brown's and Rick Barnes' success was due to the school and not the other way around. Now they look stupid - and I like that look on them.
Coaches and players that get almost to the top but don’t win the championship do not receive due credit. Marv Levy, Bud Grant, Tony Gwynn, Charles Barkley, John Stockton, Ted Williams, Don Coryell come to mind. All were great. Many more. Mark Few in the college ranks. All were tops in their profession but the world today puts everything in winning the championship. Huggins and McKillop have been around a long time.
Reminds me of a poem, I think an old Greek warrior poem, can’t remember - for king ward (the poet).
“Glory is given to the first and pity to the last,
but never a word is said to those who saw but never passed
the final goal, beheld the prize, just could not quite attain,
Tragic ones, indeed they are, the neither crowned nor slain.”
Reminds me of a poem, I think an old Greek warrior poem, can’t remember - for king ward (the poet).
“Glory is given to the first and pity to the last,
but never a word is said to those who saw but never passed
the final goal, beheld the prize, just could not quite attain,
Tragic ones, indeed they are, the neither crowned nor slain.”
Makes sense to me to let a coach go mid season if you know that coach isn't the right one. I don't see much upside in keeping a lame duck coach. A coach being on the warm or hot seat is a different situation. That's more about fair warning, and do better or move along. From what I read with Mack, there were other circumstances that led to him accepting a partial buyout. Sounds like Louisville knew he wasn't the right guy for multiple reasons.
Wow, didn't mean to touch a nerve. I don't even know who you are, dude. Just pointing out that citing former Xavier coaches as a sign that mid-major coaches don't win at higher levels is really dumb (if you call Xavier a mid-major) given the success that Skip Prosser, Thad Matta and Sean Miller have had after leaving the Musketeers.
And I don't think anyone who knows much about hoops who would call Xavier a mid-major anymore. But, that's a matter of opinion. However, calling Marquette (Tom Crean) a mid-major program is just silly. Now Western (Darrin Horn), and Murray State (Steve Newton) certainly.
Having a football program has zilch to do with being a mid-major basketball program. The Big East, of which Marquette and Xavier are members has been a better basketball conference than the SEC most years since its founding in the early 80's, with this year being a notable exception.
I swear talking basketball with a Gamecock is like speaking Spanish to someone with whom its a second language. Although, if I hadn't grown up during the McGuire years, I probably wouldn't follow it either given how bad we've been over the last 40 years
Last edited:
Auriemma is a women’s coach and he isn’t leaving UConn. If he wanted to coach men’s basketball he probably could have had the UConn job after Calhoun left.
Of those coaches you named, wasn’t Xavier in the Atlantic 10 when they coached? The Big East used to be a big named conference with Louisville, Syracuse, etc…but when many of the teams left they basically filled the conference with Mid-Majors. You can call it whatever you want.
Xavier is a good program. Wichita State is a good program. Creighton is a good program. To me, all of these fit the mid-major label. The real issue in today’s game is the “Mid-major” teams have become better programs that the middle to lower tier power conference teams. But in definition, I still consider them mid-majors, and I think everyone does. It’s not a slight…more just how they are identified.
FWIW, if you google the definition of mid-major, you get this: Mid-major is a term used in American NCAA Division I college sports, particularly men's basketball, to refer to athletic conferences that are not among the so-called "Power Five conferences" (the ACC, Big 10, Big 12, Pac-12, and SEC), which are alternatively referred to as "high majors."
That's cool. And if its on Google, it has to be true! Anyway, as I said, if you DO consider Xavier a mid-major, the success of Skip Prosser, Thad Matta and Sean Miller after leaving the Musketeers blows a pretty big hole in his theory that coaches from mid-major schools can't make the jump to whatever he considers to be bigger than mid-major.
In reality, no one who follows basketball would consider Xavier, Gonzaga, Villanova, Marquette, BYU', Cincinnati, Houston, Georgetown (even though they're down now), Memphis, etc to be on a level below the Boston College's, Ole Miss's, South Carolina's, Northwestern's, Colorado's of the world just because they aren't in Power 5 football conferences. Mid-major basketball programs are the likes of Western Kentucky and Murray State as he mentioned, College of Charleston, Loyola, Davidson, George Mason and the like. And many of them still have good basketball programs BTW
Last edited:
