I wanted one of two things: 1. A black coach who could go into the inner cities and sit in the homes of those families and tell them why they should be at LSU. Brady couldn't do that. That was Butch's job. or 2. Someone who was a great player. I would have preferred #1, because great players can make an average coach look good, but Ford fulfills No. 2 certainly.
I wonder if the guy in your sig can coach? If not, I bet he could recruit his azz off. :hihi: Let's hire him!
I dont think race matters that much as much as getting the parents approval. When Croom was with the Packers a lot of fans wanted him at their school because they thought he would be a huge recruiting advantage. But when you look at the top recruiters in each sport race has little to do with it -- and it isn't really based on the school they coach, because they could be successful at any school. I want a coach that can relate to players. Everyone knows x's and o's but getting players to buy in and care is a lot more difficult. The best coaches are the best motivational speakers.
Look when I say I'm not "playing the race card" all I'm saying is that I'm not making race the determining factor... but, I am saying that it could be a factor, even if subsconcious. It's interesting to me that two of our strongest candidates, Grant and Butch, happen to be black, and all of the sudden Travis Ford becomes the guy (if rumors are true). Collis Temple makes a point to advocate that a black HC would be a good step for LSU. Dale Brown pushes Johnny Jones. We've got 3 legit candidates who are black. If Ford gets the nod, at least part of the perceived "job" of LSU's head coach is bring excitement to the sport and rally the community. Do you think race plays any part in that question? I'm not saying it does or doesn't in LSU's case, but it certainly could. It may be that Ford is a favorite b/c he's a favorite of Lombardi's and not b/c of his race. But, think twice before you cast off the possibility that LSU, a school that has never had a black men's HC, might have an issue with a black HC in a major sport. It's certainly been brought up in the media. I wasn't advocating for Grant b/c he is black. I was advocating him b/c he's a coach with a little bit more impressive record. His being black would have been a bonus and it would have really put LSU's money where its mouth was in terms of diversity. Likewise, if Ford gets the job I'm not saying it's because he's white, but when most of your top candidates are black, it's a question you ask.
I just said it wont make a difference in recruiting -- good recruiters do that. The rest of the spin off of someone else's race if for someone else to look at as I like the best coach, not tan.
wow, I hereby disqualify myself from any college basketball talk ever. I can name the 25 man rosters of the drays and pirates but thought travis ford was black. goodbye.
First and foremost I want a good coach, I don't care what color he is because if you are a good coach good kids will want to you play for you. If that good coach happens to be African American, then that is good too. If Grant wanted the LSU job, I think he would have it...it appears he doesn't for whatever reason so we move on.
Do you honestly believe that Lombardi is going to pass up on a coach who is better qualified because some fans might not support a black man? The only "issue" with us hiring a black coach is that the best available coaches at times when we were hiring happened to be white. Wins=Butts in seats=$$$$. They never had a problem selling out Bud Walton Arena in Fayetteville when Nolan Richardson was winning up there. Nolan was as inflammatory a personality as you could have. He was always pulling the racecard. People generally didnt like his political views but EVERYONE loved his basketball teams. They sold out a 20,000 seat arena for TEN YEARS without a single non sellout game. Bottom line is, LSU can't ignore examples like that and the only people who think that LSU is purposely not hiring black coaches are people with alternative agendas (see the al sharptons and jesse jacksons of the world). That being said, there seems to be this exaggerated manlove for anthony grant. While I think that Grant is a good up and comer, I don't see why he is any better or worse than Ford. FACT: Grant did win in the tourney, HOWEVER, people seem to be forgetting that he won with a team built and recruited by Jeff Capel. Winning with the previous coaches players does not NECESSARILY mean that you are a great coach. (see larry coker also see les miles on the other side). This year Grant lost in the first round of the NIT. While he has the pedigree (so does Ford), plays a fun style (so does Ford), and has won one game in the tourney against an always overrated Duke team, you have to ask yourself if that one tournament win is enough to make him head and shoulders above the rest of the candidates. I think it certainly looks good and is a plus but I wouldnt venture to say that should be the deciding factor. FACT: The jury is still out on both coaches so there is no absolute sure answer to who's better. You also have to ask yourself is it more impressive to take a talent laden team that you did not recruit to the second round of the NCAA tournament or is it more impressive to completely revive and reenergize a program that has been dead for 10 years?(sound familiar?) While I'll reiterate that I think he would be a solid hire, I'll also reiterate that at this point, saying that Grant is better than Ford hands down is false IMO. The main point I'm trying to make here is DONT GET CAUGHT UP IN BIG NAME HYPE. Everyone wants the big/hot name du jour, but think back to the most successful coaches we have had recently here. Noone had heard of or was clamoring for Nick Saban, Les Miles, or Pokey Chatman. I'm pretty sure they weren't the hottest names on the boards, but we hired them and they all paid off big time. Big Ups Skip Bertman. We are gonna miss you. :geauxtige:crystal::crystal:
:hihi: I like the way you put that and it's not only true, it's the bottom line. Easy mate, I might take offense to that. It was the "clamoring" after that hire that we ran into trouble with. :wink:
