SI article on recruiting. Can't post a link yet because I can't find one but it was in the magazine this week. Quotes from Dooley also. The main focus of the article is that College Basketball assistant coaches are recruiters first and foremost and coaches second. I hope that Lonergan will take this into consideration when choosing his staff. One reason why Chillious has been such a successful recruiter so quickly is because he is tied in with Nike basketball and many prominent AAU circles on both coasts. I have heard that we are talking to  potential assistant who has not been publicly named yet who would fill this void perfectly. He coached one of the top high school teams in the country until recently and has a ton of connections. I'm sorry but these are the guys the school needs to be going after if we want to compete with the big boys, personal relationships aside. Chillious barely knew Lorenzo Romar before going to UW but do you think Romar is sorry he took him on now?

Completely agree, DEA.  I hope Lonegran can land the potential assistant you reference. I am also optimistic Turner may open some doors in Southern Virginia / Richmond area with his Charlottesville connections. 

DEA, thanks for the post. is Lonergan waiting to announce assistants until all the positions are filled?

I'm not sure when he will announce or even if he's made any decisions yet. The person I know they were talking to I heard from that end, not from the GW end. My guess is they would announce within the next week or so but who knows. 

Not sure if anyone listened to the radio interview I posted in another thread, but ML said that he will offer jobs to all his current assistants and will not leave them unemployed.  Now that would depend on whether his old assistants are in the hunt for the new Vermont staff and their new jobs at GW wouldn't have to be as an assistant coach, but I think that vow is at least part of the reason for the delays in naming the GW assistants.

Here's the story: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1185386/index.htm

 I heard that and hoped that it was a mistake on his part. If he plans to do that than hopefully Nero steps in and tells him no. Just because he's the new coach doesn't make him bigger than the program. The worst possible situation for us from a recruiting standpoint would be to have that staff.

http://uvmathletics.com/roster.aspx?path=mbball

Look at the coaching bios besides Turner(who I like as a hire). Forget competing with Xavier and Dayton for recruits, we won't be able to compete with Fordham. 

 I heard that and hoped that it was a mistake on his part. If he plans to do that than hopefully Nero steps in and tells him no. Just because he's the new coach doesn't make him bigger than the program. The worst possible situation for us from a recruiting standpoint would be to have that staff.

http://uvmathletics.com/roster.aspx?path=mbball

Look at the coaching bios besides Turner(who I like as a hire). Forget competing with Xavier and Dayton for recruits, we won't be able to compete with Fordham. 

 Kevin Sutton - Sutton spent the past eight years as the head coach at Montverde Academy outside Orlando, building one of the nation’s top high school teams before leaving the school after this past season. He has international connections and also knows the Washington area well, as a former assistant to Stu Vetter and then as the head coach at Montrose Christian before going to Montverde.

 Kevin Sutton - Sutton spent the past eight years as the head coach at Montverde Academy outside Orlando, building one of the nation’s top high school teams before leaving the school after this past season. He has international connections and also knows the Washington area well, as a former assistant to Stu Vetter and then as the head coach at Montrose Christian before going to Montverde.

Maybe GW should look at one of those "runners" for the shoe/athletic companies.  They have the contacts and are ussually adept at getting the kids some walking around money without getting caught. 

bobo makes a great point!! Hiring "runners" from strong AAU teams especially local ones such as D.C.Assault has really paid off for schools such as Kansas State, Syracuse, Rutgers and Georgetown. All of those schools have given assistant coaching positions to D.C.Assault "runners" in recent years. Team Takeover has now emerged as the premier local AAU organization, maybe their guys will start getting assistant coaching positions.

 Florida Colonial- non denial from me. 

Sutton getting mentioned along other familiar (surprising?) names for possible assistants at CPCC: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/recruiting-insider/post/turgeon-says-he-will-hire-assistants-with-local-ties/2011/05/11/AFTR3bsG_blog.html

Cite your sources FC! ;)

 I see Turgeon has no problem not bringing his entire staff over from A and M. And that's with a significantly better team in a significantly better conference with significantly more connections. 

Think at first glance, it would seem to be ridiculous for Lonergan to bring in his whole staff as assistants,anyway. Especially with Roland and potential Erik, Donyell Marshall, who has to be a powerful recruiting and inspiration force with AAU connections, and even Greg. Collucci, who was pretty much born with coach's acument. And all of the opportunities for good assistants outside of the Vermont becnh.

Lonergans perogrative technically and traditionally, but he better make it work. That would be a little too much America East. Maybe he will find them other jobs within the program or the department. Hopefully, that could be what he means.

I am not liking this thread.  We have to hire useless middle guys to pitch the school - and know going into this that they may not be able to coach - and you guys are accepting this as something we have to do to compete?

Lonergan should hire the assistants he wants for whatever reasons he wants. If they have local cred - great. If they can tap the AAU circuit - great. If they can mine the northeast corridor or Florida - great. If they can teach guys to shoot from outside - great. If they can develop big men - great. If they simply complement his skill set - great. But let's not demean Houston or Marshall that their value is tied to their family connections. Let's not fall for every top whatever list or big name school resume as the sole arbiter of who can coach, recruit, or relate to players.  But most of all, why are we second guessing and criticizing the new coach before he even gets his feet on the ground?  He's got a hell of a lot more at stake in his being successful than we do. Do you really think he's not going to try to put together the best staff for him and GW basketball with full awareness of what individual candidates bring to the table in terms of coaching acumen and recruiting contacts and abilities?

Somewhere along the way, all of these assistant coaches that are now deemed "great recruiters" had to develop themselves into great recruiters.  They made their connections with the appropriate people- and probably more importantly- with the players. 

No matter who the assistant coaches are, I think they deserve some time to show what they can do.  It's easy to say "these guys stink, they came from the AE and can't recruit."  Now they have a different product to sell- maybe they can sell it. 

As poog said, ML has an awful lot at stake here- I can't imagine he is going to bring in his buddies, if he doesn't believe his buddies can do a good job.

I agree with Poog. Lonergan is entitled to put together the coaching staff he wants. Back off-- it's none of our business!  Maybe we should go back to debating whether Hobbs should have been fired or not.

 That's the attitude that I don't understand. The "it's none of our business one". We have threads on this board currently about a player's personal life, an 18 year olds twitter page and a lot of other things that are way less of our business then the assistant coaches for the basketball team. Just because Lonergan has a lot invested doesn't mean he can't make a wrong decision. Did Hobbs not have a lot invested when he brought Albittron in? I believe that's still the longest thread in board history on the many reasons why that was wrong. Just like that bringing in assistants with little to no experience could work technically, but why does that mean we have to be happy about it? Would they be happy about it at the Maryland board? What about Georgetown? Hell would they happy about it at the Mason board if they hired Lonergan and he brought all of his friends over to coach with him? This is a big business, just because he's new doesn't mean he's immune from criticism. 

Kevin Sutton is in the mix. So is Becker, Howes, Jones and possibly one or two other names. Not heard much about RH but I assume they are talking to him. Only definite at this point is Turner. Sutton would be a great get because of his recruiting ties. Howes would be a solid assistant and Jones would be good as the operations guy. If it ends up Turner, Sutton, Howes and Jones I believe we will not be disappointed long-term. Short-term we may have to deal with a Copes defection.

Seneca, is a Copes defection just a guess, or did you hear something?

 Who are Becker, Howes, Jones ? Sounds like a law firm. Is that Vaughn Jones?

Nobody said Lonergan is or should be immune to criticism. I just don't understand how he can legitimately be criticized over his projected selection of assistants about whom we know little in contrast to supposedly more favorably regarded assistants about whom we know equally little.   I can understand people lobbying for Coach Houston on the assumption that it guarantees the arrival of Erik Copes about whom we've salivated for over a year. Beyond that, I'm just perplexed why fans think they have a better handle on which assistants Lonergan needs to put on his staff to make GW a winner. Sure appears to me that the names surfaced by or attributed to having raised  Lonergan interest are all good candidates.

 I said that I would have a problem with all of the Vermont assistants coming here because they are not all good candidates, not even close. You are right that because no assistants have been formally selected yet that this thread is a little early, I'm just putting out my thoughts. GW fans should not be happy if the entire Vermont coaching staff comes down here like was mentioned on that radio show. If that was just misspeak than great. I just don't see the point of investing millions in a new arena just to hire an American East staff. 

DEA, what credentials do you have to assert that some of the UVM assts are not good candidates not even close? have you coached at the college or pro level?  thanks for giving ML and Nero your full confidence.

LA Fan - nothing definite yet just an educated guess based on a few other factors.

 Newtman- What credentials did most of this board have to say that Hobbs wasn't doing a good job? I've never coached basketball at the college level but I've been around the sport for long enough to make some judgments. I'm not trying to pick fights or say that Lonergan won't be a good coach because I think he will. I'm saying that the GW fan base should be unhappy for multiple reasons if the assistants he chooses are solely the ones from the Vermont staff like he said in that interview. I don't think that's such a ridiculous statement. 

You mean like UConn hiring Jim Calhoun out of Northeastern? Lonergan made the point that D-3 has a lot of good coaches, every bit as good as their more successful D-1 counterparts. All they need is an opportunity, like the one Gary Williams gave Lonergan at Maryland. Same holds for coaches out of the AE or other non-marquee big conference schools. Again, as mentioned by Lonergan at his press conference, DeMatha had a pretty fair life-long coach. I could understand your objection to bringing the whole kit and caboodle of coaches from Vermont if they were all born and raised in Burlington...probably not enough diversity or exposure to basketball outside of New England. But that's not the case...they just happen to have been drawn and put together there by the head coach who is now ours. DEA: I realize your preference was Dooley because of his recruiting reputation but you ought to at least give Lonergan the benefit of the doubt that he knows what he's doing in putting together his staff and that he knows who is and isn't a good candidate to be one of his assistants.

Poog, I don't think it's fair to make a blanket statement that everyone here knows little about either ML's current assistants or other names that may be perceived as better candidates.  All DEA appears to be saying is that there are some better available candidates than at least 1 or some of ML's current assistant coaches.  I am confident that this is based primarily on their local or regional connections.  You are implying that the familiarity that ML has with his current assistants gives that group as a whole an overall advantage.  There's merit to both sides of this.

poog, nice post.

DEA, GW fans had the last 4 years to assess KH's performance. what are you basing your opinionabout UVM assts on? was KH a college HC before coming to GW? i think the answer is no.  KH took us to 3 NCAAs all credcit to him. that didnt buy him a lifetime position. the last 4 years led the admin to fire him. let's give the new AD and coaching staff a chance.

Newtman, your response to DEA was a nice answer to the question "why did GW release KH from his contract?"  Unfortunately, DEA is addressing something entirely different than this.

I was happy with the Lonergan hire and I'm more optimistic about the program than I have been in a while.  I also think if next year's team does really well then Hobbs deserves his fair share of the credit for assembling that team.

With the assistants I kind of side with what DEA is saying.  Of course Lonergan gets to choose his assistants, but it is about GW as a basketball program.  None of us are fully qualified to make those selections, but it would be difficult to understand if he filled his entire bench with UVM assistants.  If Houston staying means that Copes is coming, then he has to be given strong consideration.  Also, Lonergan may not be tied into the AAU circuit and he may not have all of the connections he needs just yet to compete with Xavier and Temple for recruits.  If GW is going to get to the top of the conference, then Lonergan needs to compete with X and Temple for recruits.  There are no if's and's or but's with that statement.  So Houston and a coach with strong AAU ties is hard to argue against.  If Turner is on board too, that is fine to hold a slot for a UVM asst.  Just my two cents, but I think a mix of assistants from different places will produce the best results.

MV: I'll admit to making a blanket statement about our knowledge of the relative merits of the various names bandied about as possible assistants. I did so to make a point. ML is putting together HIS staff, not standing at the head of an American Idols coaching staff voted on by the fans.  I suspect there are always "some better available candidates" out there; I just object to the notion that having served as Lonergan's assistants at Vermont somehow diminishes their qualities or abilities or that we would know who is the best fit. Guess I see it as one thing to suggest guys as potential coaches and quite another to criticize other candidates seemingly based on the fact that they coached together under ML at Vermont. Ultimately, none of us will have a say. And that's how it should be.

 LA Fan- You summed up my thoughts exactly.

We can agree to disagree on this one and while none of us have a say this board is pretty good at setting the media coverage for GW basketball. Most stories I see come out about basketball come from this board first not the other way around. While I highly doubt Lonergan reads this board I know that some other people highly involved in GW athletics do. 

DEA what do you mean by none of us has a say

MV, you have a point. i have the same credentials as you and most others here have - NONE. i responded that at least those criticizing KH had a body of work to examine (facts). how they are interpreted may differ. what facts do you or DEA have that UVM assistants cant recruit, just asking.i and others would like to hear your FACTS about UVM recruiters. i may be wrong but i believe recruits choose a school not based on who the recruiter is. for example, do you think Wingnut would have as much success recruiting at GW as he's had a Kansas? anxiously awaiting response.

I think that Lonergan will assemble a staff very capable of recruiting in the Washington area with Mike from Bowie, the current Coach at Catholic, and probably Vaughn Jones who is a local high school coach now.  I am convinced that a lot of the recruiting prowess of Joe Dooley at Kansas and Karl Hobbs at UConn was due to the school.  "I'm Joe Dooley recruiting you for Rider" doesn't have the same oomph to it as "I'm Joe Dooley from Kansas."

Newtman, I do not have facts to support the argument nor am I the one making the argument.  I think it's easy to surmise that most of the UVM assistants are not well-connected to this area, at least in comparison to other names being mentioned here.

Let's also put to bed this notion that Dooley and Hobbs were successful recruiters because of the schools they were at.  Their competition for kids came in the form of Kentucky and Duke and UNC and Arizona and Syracuse and Ohio State and Texas... And while I haven't looked it up, it doesn't appear that Kansas with Dooley or UCONN with Hobbs had too many down years, unlike Arizona and UNC and Kentucky and plenty of other big names who have stumbled here and there.

MV, you said 'Let's also put to bed this notion that Dooley and Hobbs were successful recruiters because of the schools they were at'. reread my post i asked ' for example, do you think Wingnut would have as much success recruiting at GW as he's had a Kansas?' are you telling me that Dooley would get the same quality player at GW that he got at Kansas? BTW from everything i read dooley is an excellent recruiter but that's not what i was talking about.

The SI story paints but one picture of an Assistant Coach.  Sure, the recruiting road is long and grueling.  But, the big test happens when the big shots arrive on campus.  Keeping up with class schedules, tutors, grades, personal issues, ad infinitum.  THAT is the unsung job of an Assistant Coach. 

That said, coaching Catholic University or University of Vermont is a DAMM sight different than GW.

The level of recruit is elevated, and for better or worse, so are the ongoing issues. Generally speaking, that is.

Hopefully, ML will recognize that he is a bit out of his league on this paramount criterion.

I would also think that he would have a good understanding of the internatinal recruiting arena, which has greatly evolved in the past couple of years.

These are serious considerations for the long haul.  Let's hope ML will see the forest for the trees.

It's one thing to debate whether our head coach is doing a good job or not. But which assistant coaches Lonergan should or shouldn't hire. Give me a break! We can't even critique our own assistants, and to pretend to know anything about Vermont's assistants is simply ludicrous!

Newtman, that was directed more towards Section 109 but I've also heard this from several others as well.  The issue isn't whether Dooley could have gotten just as good players to play at GW than he does at Kansas.  Of course he couldn't have and this is a pointless discussion.  My point is that some people (not you) are attributing the abilities of recruiters like Dooley and Hobbs (while at UCONN) to nothing more than the good fortune of being at great basketball schools.  This is also wrong.  Recruiters at top-flight schools are constantly up against recruiters from other top-flight schools so to be effectively recruiting at a school that is consistently successful (like Kansas) is far more easier said than done.  NC State is a great example of a big public school with great basketball tradition (David Thompson, national championship under Jim Valvano) in a great conference with presumably all of the resources in the world for recruiting, yet they've done next to nothing for decades now.  Look at Michigan since the Fab 5.  UCLA over the past several seasons.  Being at a great basketball school does not make great recruiting an automatic slam dunk.

Newtman, that was directed more towards Section 109 but I've also heard this from several others as well.  The issue isn't whether Dooley could have gotten just as good players to play at GW than he does at Kansas.  Of course he couldn't have and this is a pointless discussion.  My point is that some people (not you) are attributing the abilities of recruiters like Dooley and Hobbs (while at UCONN) to nothing more than the good fortune of being at great basketball schools.  This is also wrong.  Recruiters at top-flight schools are constantly up against recruiters from other top-flight schools so to be effectively recruiting at a school that is consistently successful (like Kansas) is far more easier said than done.  NC State is a great example of a big public school with great basketball tradition (David Thompson, national championship under Jim Valvano) in a great conference with presumably all of the resources in the world for recruiting, yet they've done next to nothing for decades now.  Look at Michigan since the Fab 5.  UCLA over the past several seasons.  Being at a great basketball school does not make great recruiting an automatic slam dunk.

 I don't want to keep bringing up Dooley because as far as I'm concerned that's in the past, but the guy has been an unbelievable recruiter everywhere he's gone. He recruited David West to East Carolina of all places and he would have gone there if Dooley hadn't gotten the bounce(imagine how that would have affected us as well with no West in the A10). That's neither here nor there in this case. Is it too much to ask to get assistants with some experience or a big name? The way I like to look at it is comparing us to our College Park neighbors. Say they had hired Lonergan, would their fans have been happy if he just brought his whole crew in and said present recruits be damned? No. So why should we? 

Just to chime in here...I think it is a fair assumption to say that the skill set/background/network required to recruit to Vermont in the AE may not necessarily be the same as it is at GW.  The product that you are trying to sell is quite different as ML alluded to in the presser.  Can the group of UVM coaches sell the positives of GW to the caliber of recruits we need to consistently compete for an A10 title?  Who knows?  But it is certaintly a fair argument to question it.  

The ML package that GW "bought" was pretty simple.  1) Good X and Os that has been proven to win at multiple levels 2) DC ties (ie being able to recruit locally and attract at least a small percentage of the local DC baskteball fanbase that wouldn't otherwise care about GW hoops) 3) 100% graduation rate (ie squeeky clean program).  So if that is indeed ML's recipe for a successful tenure at GW then he needs a staff to do this.  Not knowing a lot about the candidates other then what has been discussed here, I would think that someone like Vaughn Jones or Kevin Sutton would fit ML's goals.  

Two side notes on the Sutton possibilty.  To dchoops point on international recruiting (which ML called out specifically in the presser), I would think Sutton would be a good fit there.  He built Montverde into a powerhouse by bringing in international players (Zwikker, Dia, Alabi, our own Joe Katuka) as well as US players.  On the flip side, does anyone know why Sutton got fired?  I am wondering if he may go against #3 above, if he may not have been following all the rules at Montverde.  Just speculation...

i'm sure this graduation rate stat isn't an exact science but if you loose someone to the draft does that count against your %?  Or can you make an exception? 

What a difference a year and a half makes.