|
|
Post by lionspride on Mar 24, 2008 13:46:27 GMT -5
According to the LA Times article I posted in another thread these are the known interested candidates so far. Among those who have been in contact with the school are -former San Diego coach Brad Holland -Denver Nuggets assistant Mike Dunlap, the former coach at Division II Metro State who is a Loyola graduate and is a former USC assistant. Other names of interest include -Fullerton's Burton -Northridge's Bobby Braswell, -USC assistant Gib Arnold and -Washington assistant Cameron Dollar If Husak only has the above individuals on his list, he is about to set the boosters over the edge. If so, Husak will be fired in 2 years. Sure there is 2 suitable (but not the quality we should be shooting for) candidates on this list. EXPAND the SEARCH HUSAK. Don't just look up and down the west coach. ugh.  We might as well go with Bo Kimble or a Westhead/Kimble combination. Burton, Dollar, Braswell are a joke and not a good fit at LMU. Husak, do not even waste your time interviewing those three candiates. |
|
|
|
Post by ironlions on Mar 24, 2008 14:15:08 GMT -5
These would be my top candidates right now:
1. Mike Montgomery
2. Steve Lavin
3. Mike Dunlap
4. Ray Giacoletti
5. Donnie Daniels
6. Gib Arnold
;D
|
|
|
|
Post by titanczar on Mar 24, 2008 15:08:52 GMT -5
I'm curious why you think Burton wouldn't be a good fit at LMU. The period of success that LMU had was built on D-1 transfers, Bo and Hank. Burton built his team on D-1 transfers and playing the little sisters of the poor.
|
|
|
|
Post by ironlions on Mar 24, 2008 15:20:33 GMT -5
These would be my top candidates right now: 1. Mike Montgomery 2. Steve Lavin 3. Mike Dunlap 4. Ray Giacoletti 5. Donnie Daniels 6. Gib Arnold 7. Bob Burton  |
|
|
|
Post by lionspride on Mar 24, 2008 15:22:40 GMT -5
These would be my top candidates right now: 1. Mike Montgomery 2. Steve Lavin 3. Mike Dunlap 4. Ray Giacoletti 5. Donnie Daniels 6. Gib Arnold ;D Ironlions.....your list is much much much more respectable than the ones listed in the Los Angeles Times. I think we should be shooting (and having the bankroll supplied by the Administration) for the talent of Montgomery or Lavin. I would LOVE for LMU to interview Nolan Richardson, but I think Husak does not want to make waves with the administration. Hussk probably will go with the "best bet/percentage" hire. Someone somewhat proven and known locally to appease the administration. Husak thinks that if he goes local west coast, he will not be faulted for a failure as much as sticking his neck out with a complete national search. Husak better expand his search if that reporter from the Los Angeles Times implicitly got that listing from Husak. Husak's job is on the line with this hire. |
|
|
|
Post by ironlions on Mar 24, 2008 15:39:40 GMT -5
The stage for a big time hire has been set. If we go with some ho-hum coach as our next hire, I will will have lost all hope in our adminstration and atheltic department. For all the campus improvements planned, laying the ground work for a top notch basketball program should be at the top of the list. Hopefully the adminstartion realizes that a succesful program is a vital assest in generateing revenuse for the athetic dept and the university.
|
|
|
|
Post by greendoberman on Mar 24, 2008 16:46:36 GMT -5
Agree that at that very least Montgomery should be contacted to see if he is interested and, if so, given an interview.
Dunlap gets an interview as well and consideration.
Donny Daniels has to be given consideration as well.
On the fence with Lavin here.
Have to believe Gib Arnold is on the short list.
Giacoletti, I'm not completely sold on, but would listen to what he has to say.
|
|
|
|
Post by greendoberman on Mar 24, 2008 16:47:27 GMT -5
In the first two posts, I did all the legwork for Husak and Bove. They have a solid list to work from. Now give me a few tickets to some games next year for my efforts, Mr. AD.  |
|
|
|
Post by ADG'99 on Mar 25, 2008 17:51:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by orangefro on Mar 25, 2008 21:50:59 GMT -5
You can probably go ahead and assume you're not going to get Montgomery or Lavin. Throughout my time with the Pepperdine coaching change, our board considered the possibility of those two coming to coach us. I'm not trying to say "Oh, if they didn't come to us, they sure as hell won't come to you" -- that's not my prerogative. But both are pretty happy where they are right now. Lavin's ESPN contract and Montgomery's retirement and work with FSN have both of them pretty much out of the running from everything that I have read. Not to say they wouldn't possibly reconsider, I would just start looking in a different direction than holding out some kind of distant hope for either of them.
Happy Hunting...
|
|
|
|
Post by lionspride on Mar 25, 2008 22:37:43 GMT -5
You can probably go ahead and assume you're not going to get Montgomery or Lavin. Throughout my time with the Pepperdine coaching change, our board considered the possibility of those two coming to coach us. I'm not trying to say "Oh, if they didn't come to us, they sure as hell won't come to you" -- that's not my prerogative. But both are pretty happy where they are right now. Lavin's ESPN contract and Montgomery's retirement and work with FSN have both of them pretty much out of the running from everything that I have read. Not to say they wouldn't possibly reconsider, I would just start looking in a different direction than holding out some kind of distant hope for either of them. Happy Hunting... If Husak has the full backing and I mean FULL backing of the administration, I think he could get a Montgomery or Lavin at LMU. Money is a driver (we have to offer atleast $400k+), but the challenge to bring a program from the celler to dominance may be even more the driver. However, I don't think that Montgomery or Lavin may have the fire in the belly to turn-around this o'd program with run down facilities. A Nolan Richardson has the fire, but the LMU Administration would be taking a chance on his attitude and authority that he brings to the position. |
|
|
|
Post by greendoberman on Mar 25, 2008 23:46:11 GMT -5
The reason Montgomery is getting a lot of buzz is based on his ties to the school and program.
1) Husak is a Stanford guy and his son was the QB when MM was the basketball coach.
2) Mike's son John played at LMU and is in his first year coaching (school escapes me, but I think it is in the Southern Conference). Montgomery coming here would likely bring his son on the staff and set up a Bob/Pat Knight thing if successful.
Those are the reasons why he merits serious consideration. Now, if he's not up to the challenge of coaching again that is his call.
|
|
|
|
Post by lionspride on Mar 26, 2008 14:52:57 GMT -5
The reason Montgomery is getting a lot of buzz is based on his ties to the school and program. 1) Husak is a Stanford guy and his son was the QB when MM was the basketball coach. 2) Mike's son John played at LMU and is in his first year coaching (school escapes me, but I think it is in the Southern Conference). Montgomery coming here would likely bring his son on the staff and set up a Bob/Pat Knight thing if successful. Those are the reasons why he merits serious consideration. Now, if he's not up to the challenge of coaching again that is his call. If Montgomery is thinking about his son and a future coaching path, then he will do it. If Mike is going to go alone without his son, John, I don't think this job has the appear for him. John is currently an assistant coach at Furman. If we could get Montgomery, I would EXTREMELY pleased. I think Mike could get our program back on track. |
|
|
|
Post by ironlions on Mar 26, 2008 15:24:39 GMT -5
Everything about LMU basketball will change if we are able to get Montgomery.
|
|
|
|
Post by lmutex on Mar 26, 2008 15:54:43 GMT -5
No way we're getting Montgomery. Braun just got fired from Cal, I'd say he's a better fit.
|
|
We might as well go with Bo Kimble or a Westhead/Kimble combination. Burton, Dollar, Braswell are a joke and not a good fit at LMU. Husak, do not even waste your time interviewing those three candiates.
