Defending the Craig Robinson Hire

by Jake Bertalotto on Apr 8, 2008 5:50 AM PDT in Men's Basketball Comment 9 comments

It's been just over twelve hours since Criag Robinson has been named as head coach of our Men's Basketball program, and already some members of Beaver Nation are voicing out in opposition.

First off, I'll start out by saying there are some things I like about this hire, and some that I don't. The one thing I'm uncertain about is the whole political influence. When I heard Robinson say that "If I can use that (my family celebrity) to win games, I'll do it", it made me question which direction we're headed. It just makes it sounds like we're using a particular political party to help get recruits, etc. I don't know where you draw the line on this conflict, but it just seems weird right now. Maybe it will grow on me, but I don't know.

Political issues aside, I think Robinson has some great potential. If you've heard him talk today at all, you'll know that he is a great public speaker, and has a great story. Bottom line, is things are going to get done the right way in Gill Coliseum from this point forward.

First, lets discuss the money factor and get that out of the way. The contract hasn't been finalized, but at the end of the day Robinson will still be one of the worst paid coaches in the Pac-10. Tell him that, and I'm sure he wont care. He knows that this is going to take work, and he cherishes that fact.

Dave over at Addicted to Quack had this to say on the OSU hire:

And the getting the right coach part is where OSU got it wrong. If you are serious about becoming competitive, you have to go out and get someone. Randy Bennett or Bill Grier weren't going to come to Corvallis for the $500,000 that stingy OSU wanted to spend. Its not worth it to go through the losing and the rebuilding for that crappy pay. If you go to Bill Grier and hand him a cool million a year, he's your coach right now. But the Beavs again tried to do this on the cheap, which only ensures a lot more losing.

You have to understand that Oregon State went 0-18 in the Pac-10 this year. We haven't won a game in 2008. After 21 straight losses, it's often a good idea to clean up the mess and put your best foot forward. And I think we're doing that. Robinson is a firm believer in working hard for things, something that's stuck with him all the way from his upbringings in Chicago. I don't think that throwing a big wad of money at this situation and hoping something prospers is the best route at this point. The season ticket holders currently aren't present, the attendances are at rock bottom, Gill needs improvements, and that's not going to chance until this basketball team changes.

This is a step by step process. As the team improves, Robinson's stock will rise, his contract will improve, and we'll continue to "Rally the Legend." If Robinson doesn't work out for Oregon State, we can only hope that he leaves his footprint on this program, wins a few games, and lets us step to the next stone of bringing in a new, bigger-name head coach.

Dave goes on to say:

Look at us. We haven't even had a baseball program for almost 30 years. No players. No stadium. But we ponied up the dough and got one of the best coaches in the country to come here. You don't think that at the very least OSU couldn't have gotten Larry Eustachy to come thug it out for a couple of years and start the road back to respectability?

I'm not going to get into the nitty gritty here, but bottom line is Oregon and Oregon State are different universities. You guys have donors who have seen Oregon State's success on the diamond and are eager to get that at your university. I don't blame you. But OSU is used to losing in basketball. We just are. There's not spirit there, there's no desire to lay down the dough to get this program back where it belongs. We need to see improvement before we can get excited. That's where "Rally the Legend" comes from. It's just a different approach to the same issue.

You've got to understand that this isn't going to happen overnight, and I think Bob de Carolis realized this first hand as he facilitated his coaching search. He realized what was really important to this team.

At the start of this search, we were looking for a guy who had roots on the west coast, had head coaching experience, a proven track record, and on and on and on. But as guys like Billy Grier and Randy Bennett pulled their names out, we realized that we're not going to be able to get those qualities in a head coach.

Instead, we started looking for a coach who would do things the right way. A coach who has an academic mission, and is a teacher on and off the court. We needed a coach devoted to making the players better each and every day, and a coach with attention to detail. And I believe we found that in Craig Robinson.

He also has head coaching experience (More than Grier, in fact), he's turned around a program, and he has personal connections and recruiting connections all around the country.

Now, Craig Robinson is not the best coach out there. He's not the best coach we could have landed in Corvallis. But he is a good guy, who, if nothing else, will have a lasting impact on these young men. Many fans out there would like to see a different coach in Corvallis, be it Larry Eustachy or someone else. Bobby D should at least pony up a list of names and details on how the search was conducted and tell us what he was thinking, but it probably isn't going to happen. That's hindsight now, and as we know, hindsight is always 20-20.

The message coming from Oregon State's athletic office is clear: Open your minds to change, understand that everyone involved in the program is working hard to get Oregon State basketball back where it belongs, and buy tickets. It's going take fans to give Oregon State the competitive advantage it needs to win.

That's us.

I'm eager to hear your comments, agreements, disagreements, criticisms, etc. Let's talk this out.

GO BEAVERS!

--JB--

0 recs | Comment 9 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Agreed

Honestly, he's got a good record.

I don't think throwing money at the situation would make it any better. So what, we bring in an awesome coach? He's just gonna sit there and treat the team like crap for not winning a single game this last season. They need someone who can build them up.

If someone from the middle of Chicago can't do that who can?

"Brett Favre looks like a man in a parking lot playing with boys." - John Madden

by kirbir on Apr 8, 2008 6:55 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

And not only a guy who can build them up...

But a guy who can grow with the players. And I think that's what we have in Robinson.

--JB--

by Jake Bertalotto on Apr 8, 2008 6:58 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Searching for Dennis Erickson

I think that there are some in Beaver fandom who remember the impact that Dennis Erickson had on the OSU football team--and forget the years immediately preceding. They remember DE getting the Beavs their first winning season in forever in Year 1, and an 11-win season (and I think we would have given Oklahoma a better fight than FSU had we made it to the Orange Bowl). There is an assumption that what worked for football, would work for basketball.

And Dennis Erickson did benefit the program intensely. He's one of the best recruiters in the business, he knows the game, and he knows how to motivate. Of course, DE has lots of flaws as well--he always keeps an eye on the exit, he'll lie through his teeth to your face if it suits him, and he tolerated a lot of nonsense while he was here.

But the rebuilding of the OSU football program from laughingstock to one of the top 30 programs in Division 1 happened way before Erickson was brought in. Arguably, it happened with the Pettibone hire--a coach who insisted upon hard work, and used an unorthodox system (the wishbone) which made the Beavs a difficult team to prepare for. Granted, the 'bone isn't gonna get you to the Rose Bowl (or even to any bowl), but OSU football at that time needed to take that first step--from god-awful to mediocre, and Pettibone enabled it. Unfortunately for Pettibone--mediocre still gets you fired after a while. Mike Riley was step 2 (and 4) of the rebuilding program, and Dennis Erickson was the capstone--the guy who put OSU football on the map. Once he left, a less-known guy like Riley could successfully run a program and have a chance at good recruits, whereas before, the Beavs were generally getting players who were considered not good enough to play elsewhere.

Right now, the OSU basketball program is where the OSU football program was in 1991--in the toilet. We're not ready for a Dennis Erickson; and no coach with those credentials is going to come here--at least not for the terms we can offer. The Beavs need to take that first step--to mediocre--before we're even on the radar screen of a "big-name" coach.

Is Craig Robinson the basketball equivalent of Jerry Pettibone? I don't know. Some similarities are apparent--Robinson is known for using a Princeton offense; which while not as unorthodox in hoops as the wishbone is in football, is a "use this if your players suck" offensive strategy. It's a scheme you generally don't run if you have talented scorers who can reliably create their own shots. As others have indicated, it probably is good for a few wins next year, as opposing teams won't be used to defending against it. However, it isn't the scheme that will get the Beavers back to the NIT (let alone the NCAAs)--star caliber players often don't like it, as it de-emphasizes guys who can beat a defense by themselves. In short--it's a good scheme to get us to mediocrity. Whether Robinson is a "believer" in the Princeton, and intends to employ it everywhere he goes, or would use other offensive sets given the appropriate players, I don't know.

It could be, that Robinson will be the coach that brings us to respectability single-handedly; that the OSU basketball team will not need a series of coaches (and nearly a decade) to do it. You only need a handful of guys to have a good basketball team, not the dozens that football requires. It could be that Robinson is indeed a Pettibone--and that his OSU tenure will end with his firing, but his successor will do well with the foundation he has built. Or, he could be yet another Dave Kragthorpe or Jay John--a guy who succeeds at lower levels of college ball, but doesn't succeed in the Pac-10. Only time will tell.

But for those who are searching for Dennis Erickson--don't. The basketball equivalent of Dennis Erickson (that would be Larry Brown) ain't coming to Corvallis. The Beavers are not ready.

I love duck. For dinner

by EngineerScotty on Apr 8, 2008 10:40 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Princeton offense

Don't forget that the Rick Adelman Sacramento King teams used a lot of Princeton principles. Legendary Princeton coach Pete Carril was one the staff. John Thompson III at Georgetown is a Princeton alum and former Tigers coach- he uses a lot of Princeton stuff as well.

It is true that players who excel at 1 on 1 play don't do well in the Princeton system, but a common misconception is that the Princeton offense is uselss with good players. Not true. Big men with good passing skills, such as Vlade Divac, Chris Webber and Jeff Green, thrive in this system.

by jksnake99 on Apr 8, 2008 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Good stuff, Scotty.

Not much else to say... you drilled it.

--JB--

by Jake Bertalotto on Apr 9, 2008 6:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

you know

The more I read about Robinson, the more I like him. But my post had very little to do with Robinson per se. It had to do with commitment.

I'm not saying that throwing a bunch of money at the problem is the answer. I realize that we are very lucky to have Phil Knight support a lot of things here that most universities can't get.
I realize that a lot of stuff (most specifically, a badly needed renovation of the Gill) aren't going to be forthcoming until wins come. And OSU football and baseball have shown that once the wins come, the facilites will be upgraded.

However, what concerns me most is that the Beavers were unable to get any of at least their top three candidates. And those are just ones that interviewed--we don't know who they may have had in their sights that didn't interview. We also have reason to belive that Randy Bennett didn't come here for money purposes (he was supposedly lowballed a contract proposal), although we now know that Robinson was given a decent $750K.

It seems to me that Bennett didn't come here because they didn't want to pay him. Why Grier and Hunter didn't come here, we don't know for sure. But there are reasons to believe that they weren't sure about the commitment that OSU has to the program.

Commitment doesn't have to mean finding a way to fund a $60 million arena renovation while the team is in the doldrums. But I have to believe that there are Beavers out there who will throw an extra $250K toward a decent coach.

Robinson may be a great coach. And I really hope that he starts to turn things around (I've said a lot of times that I'm not a Beaver hater, I want both programs to be strong). But OSU has to find a way to get out of the cellar. You only get so many opportunities to do something like hire a coach, and the wrong decision can hold you down for another five years. So, when you get that chance, you have to pony up to get the man you really want. And there is a Beaver out there somewhere who is willing to put up $250 K for that coach.

You've gotta get the guy you really want, and I question whether BDC did that. He once again showed a lack of commitment to the program.

--Dave

Addicted to Quack, SBN's Oregon Ducks Blog

by Addicted to Quack on Apr 8, 2008 11:40 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Commitment?

Commitment to the program, or commitment to the coach?

As the past 18 years in Cowvallis have shown, being committed to the wrong coach can devastate a program. Jimmy Anderson was a disaster; Ritchie McKay almost as bad; Eddie Payne and Jay John were simply over their heads.

I don't know if either Grier or Bennett would have been better fits than Robinson. Something tells met that Bennett wasn't all that interested in the job--which is understandable. The record books are littered with coaches who make the jump into the wrong major-program, fail and are fired, and find themselves tagged with the "bust" label. Look at Eddie Payne, for example--prior to OSU, he was at mid-major East Carolina. After OSU, his next gig was Division III Greensboro, followed by a promotion to then-Div. II USC-Upstate (they became a Div I program just this season). If I were an up-and-coming coach, I'd think twice before taking a position in a program with a well-established reputation as a coaches' graveyard. Robinson is either very brave, crazy, or stupid to come here... and he obviously isn't stupid, so it must be one of the first two.

As an aside--why is it that every time a coach takes a mid-major team to the NCAAs, he's automatically a candidate for every major-conference coaching vacancy, especially those in his backyard? I'm not complaining about guys like Mark Few who have built dominant programs at mid-majors; instead I'm complaining about the notion that a guy like Ken Bone is due a promotion to a major conference because he got PSU to the big dance one year. Somebody has to win the Big Sky, and that somebody gets an automatic dance ticket. Nothing against Bone, who is a fine coach; I'm just complaining about the notion that one NCAA bid should mean an automatic promotion. End rant. :)

I love duck. For dinner

by EngineerScotty on Apr 8, 2008 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Robinson seems more brave than crazy

By saying that he will coach to the strengths of his players Robinson seems to be taking away the common excuse for not winning commonly given by new coaches of "We don't have the players to run my system yet". Removing his own personal excuses for not winning and leaving himself open for criticism should he not win seems like a brave move to me.

by tingeyga on Apr 8, 2008 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs