[BostonCard]

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...y-retires/

Here are some of the names you’ll be likely to read in coming days: Ben Howland, Randy Bennett, Russell Turner, perhaps even Jerod Haase.

Now, this is Wilner talking, so it is not much better than throwing darts.  But I will note for 71Bear's sake that Krystkowiak is not on there.  I'm just hoping not Russell Turner, as I would like us to look at him after Dawkins moves on.

BC

[BostonCard]

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegespor...y-retires/

Here are some of the names you’ll be likely to read in coming days: Ben Howland, Randy Bennett, Russell Turner, perhaps even Jerod Haase.

Now, this is Wilner talking, so it is not much better than throwing darts.  But I will note for 71Bear's sake that Krystkowiak is not on there.  I'm just hoping not Russell Turner, as I would like us to look at him after Dawkins moves on.

BC

[FarmBoy]

From the SFGate.com story:

Barbour said the search for a replacement will be a national one and will begin immediately. She has retained the same search firm, DHR, that she used in identifying Sonny Dykes as the right fit to succeed Jeff Tedford as football coach in 2012.

It almost makes you feel sorry for Ca.l fans.

Look up "tone-deaf" in the dictionary and you'll see a picture of Sandy Barbour. Even if Sonny ends up being a decent hire, right now, the worlds things you blew it big time on that one. To hire the same firm to support this search just seems like doubling down on a long-odds bet.

[FarmBoy]

From the SFGate.com story:

Barbour said the search for a replacement will be a national one and will begin immediately. She has retained the same search firm, DHR, that she used in identifying Sonny Dykes as the right fit to succeed Jeff Tedford as football coach in 2012.

It almost makes you feel sorry for Ca.l fans.

Look up "tone-deaf" in the dictionary and you'll see a picture of Sandy Barbour. Even if Sonny ends up being a decent hire, right now, the worlds things you blew it big time on that one. To hire the same firm to support this search just seems like doubling down on a long-odds bet.

[washingtonismoney]

I think those search firms are big red herrings -- they're just around to provide plausible deniability for coaches and schools.

[washingtonismoney]

I think those search firms are big red herrings -- they're just around to provide plausible deniability for coaches and schools.

[FarmBoy]

I think those search firms are big red herrings -- they're just around to provide plausible deniability for coaches and schools.

Kind of like McKinsey, BCG and Bain....

[FarmBoy]

I think those search firms are big red herrings -- they're just around to provide plausible deniability for coaches and schools.

Kind of like McKinsey, BCG and Bain....

[CTcard]

I think those search firms are big red herrings -- they're just around to provide plausible deniability for coaches and schools.

Plausible deniability of what?

Though I certainly would agree that for a decent AD they don't do much - probably the leg work of checking if the top candidate made up his resume.

[CTcard]

I think those search firms are big red herrings -- they're just around to provide plausible deniability for coaches and schools.

Plausible deniability of what?

Though I certainly would agree that for a decent AD they don't do much - probably the leg work of checking if the top candidate made up his resume.

[FarmBoy]

Has an AD ever gotten off the hook for a bad hire by pointing to the search firm they employed?

[FarmBoy]

Has an AD ever gotten off the hook for a bad hire by pointing to the search firm they employed?

[Mick]

I think those search firms are big red herrings -- they're just around to provide plausible deniability for coaches and schools.

Kind of like McKinsey, BCG and Bain....

My work with those organizations has been limited, but one of my prior firms hired BCG to implement a specific series of processes that would have required senior managers to perform 50-100 additional hours worth of work annually...for no extra pay.  Here's the conversation between the BCG consultant and my boss:

Boss:  "So you're telling me that our managers and senior managers will be doing 50-100 hours worth of work annually?  The busiest people in our firm?  And why would they be doing that exactly?  They aren't getting paid for it.  They won't get any billable credit for it.  So why would they do it?"

BCG:  "Well...it will help them make partner."

Boss:  "No it won't."

BCG:  (long pause)  "Well it should."

[Mick]

I think those search firms are big red herrings -- they're just around to provide plausible deniability for coaches and schools.

Kind of like McKinsey, BCG and Bain....

My work with those organizations has been limited, but one of my prior firms hired BCG to implement a specific series of processes that would have required senior managers to perform 50-100 additional hours worth of work annually...for no extra pay.  Here's the conversation between the BCG consultant and my boss:

Boss:  "So you're telling me that our managers and senior managers will be doing 50-100 hours worth of work annually?  The busiest people in our firm?  And why would they be doing that exactly?  They aren't getting paid for it.  They won't get any billable credit for it.  So why would they do it?"

BCG:  "Well...it will help them make partner."

Boss:  "No it won't."

BCG:  (long pause)  "Well it should."

[Bruce Wang]

OMG I can't believe a Division 1 AD has hired a headhunter to identify head coaches.  I can see the values headhunters deliver by brokering information on candidates where there is not a lot of public information e.g. middle management and VPs (though the Internet and LinkedIn has eroded that value).  In the case of head coaches, however, their profile is already high and information on their performance public and quantifiable.

[Bruce Wang]

OMG I can't believe a Division 1 AD has hired a headhunter to identify head coaches.  I can see the values headhunters deliver by brokering information on candidates where there is not a lot of public information e.g. middle management and VPs (though the Internet and LinkedIn has eroded that value).  In the case of head coaches, however, their profile is already high and information on their performance public and quantifiable.

[Redrum]

I thought Montgomery's tenure at Stanford worked for everybody concerned.  He tried the pros and bailed on that.  It was the Warriors.  Who wouldn't?  While he was actively coaching the Ba.res I had no love for him, but no hate, either.  The only thing I DO hold against him were some of the statements he made about how freeing it was to be at K.al and how he really liked blue much more than red and some other twaddle about the quality of life in the East Bay.  That was just stupid.  They hired him for his track record.  IF the Ba.res also required some act of contrition or testimony of some change in his soul's allegiances, then shame on them.  If he went along or came up with that whole shtick himself,  shame on him.

But, we was a good coach, a decent man and contributed a lot to Stanford.

[Redrum]

I thought Montgomery's tenure at Stanford worked for everybody concerned.  He tried the pros and bailed on that.  It was the Warriors.  Who wouldn't?  While he was actively coaching the Ba.res I had no love for him, but no hate, either.  The only thing I DO hold against him were some of the statements he made about how freeing it was to be at K.al and how he really liked blue much more than red and some other twaddle about the quality of life in the East Bay.  That was just stupid.  They hired him for his track record.  IF the Ba.res also required some act of contrition or testimony of some change in his soul's allegiances, then shame on them.  If he went along or came up with that whole shtick himself,  shame on him.

But, we was a good coach, a decent man and contributed a lot to Stanford.

[yvonne]

OMG I can't believe a Division 1 AD has hired a headhunter to identify head coaches.  I can see the values headhunters deliver by brokering information on candidates where there is not a lot of public information e.g. middle management and VPs (though the Internet and LinkedIn has eroded that value).  In the case of head coaches, however, their profile is already high and information on their performance public and quantifiable.

You are aware that Stanford used a search firm to help find Harbaugh, right?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2...-coaching/

[yvonne]

OMG I can't believe a Division 1 AD has hired a headhunter to identify head coaches.  I can see the values headhunters deliver by brokering information on candidates where there is not a lot of public information e.g. middle management and VPs (though the Internet and LinkedIn has eroded that value).  In the case of head coaches, however, their profile is already high and information on their performance public and quantifiable.

You are aware that Stanford used a search firm to help find Harbaugh, right?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2...-coaching/

[Leftcoast]

Using an exec recruiting firm for head coaching hires is a common practice. 

Stanford has also used them for high profile hires. They are another tool for busy ADs and, I suspect, a way to test the water with high profile coaches before an AD has let the previous guy go and without getting his/her own hands dirty.

The reason such firms specializing in sports exist is they have a sizable market.

[Leftcoast]

Using an exec recruiting firm for head coaching hires is a common practice. 

Stanford has also used them for high profile hires. They are another tool for busy ADs and, I suspect, a way to test the water with high profile coaches before an AD has let the previous guy go and without getting his/her own hands dirty.

The reason such firms specializing in sports exist is they have a sizable market.

[washingtonismoney]

Stanford has also used them for high profile hires. They are another tool for busy ADs and, I suspect, a way to test the water with high profile coaches before an AD has let the previous guy go and without getting his/her own hands dirty.

Right. That and that way the approached coach can claim, "I haven't been talking with any other schools!" when convenient. The AD can claim, "I only offered the job to [candidate X]."

The search firm also probably does a lot of the scut work as well -- arranging the super-secret meeting place for final candidates, eliminating some people who are unrealistic, etc.

Point is, if you have a record of crummy hiring decisions, my bet is most of it is on the AD.

[washingtonismoney]

Stanford has also used them for high profile hires. They are another tool for busy ADs and, I suspect, a way to test the water with high profile coaches before an AD has let the previous guy go and without getting his/her own hands dirty.

Right. That and that way the approached coach can claim, "I haven't been talking with any other schools!" when convenient. The AD can claim, "I only offered the job to [candidate X]."

The search firm also probably does a lot of the scut work as well -- arranging the super-secret meeting place for final candidates, eliminating some people who are unrealistic, etc.

Point is, if you have a record of crummy hiring decisions, my bet is most of it is on the AD.

[teejers1]

"Montgomery, in interviews at the time, said he asked Bob Bowlsby before taking the job if he shouldn't. This is why I've never believed for a moment that Bowlsby was deliberately pushing Trent Johnson out."

I don't pretend to know what really happened; however, reputable people close to Coach Johnson relayed to me at the time that Trent truly felt that Bowlsby didn't want him around.  So I have little doubt that Johnson felt that way, and his camp pointed to the lack of a contract extension as proof positive that Bowlsby was pushing Trent out.  Maybe.  But the fact that undermines this assertion, at least to me, is the painfully obvious cluster bomb that was "the successor search."  It was so clear to me that Bowlsby had no "short list" of replacements and that the whole process was an inartful scramble, resulting from Bowlsby being caught off guard by Trent taking the $$/job at LSU. If Bowlsby really was planning on pushing Trent out, you'd think he'd have a replacement or two in mind.

Nope.  Instead, we had a prolonged, semi-secret cluster search which supposedly almost resulted in the hiring of Larry Brown.  And there is NO WAY on God's green earth that Larry Brown was on any short list of Bowlsby! 

So in retrospect, I come down on the classic "failure to communicate" between coach and AD that was pretty much "lose/lose."  Yeah, Trent got paid, and I hope he (by all accounts a good man and loyal friend) and his family are happy.  But from a coaching standpoint, his post-Farm career hasn't exactly been stellar.

[teejers1]

"Montgomery, in interviews at the time, said he asked Bob Bowlsby before taking the job if he shouldn't. This is why I've never believed for a moment that Bowlsby was deliberately pushing Trent Johnson out."

I don't pretend to know what really happened; however, reputable people close to Coach Johnson relayed to me at the time that Trent truly felt that Bowlsby didn't want him around.  So I have little doubt that Johnson felt that way, and his camp pointed to the lack of a contract extension as proof positive that Bowlsby was pushing Trent out.  Maybe.  But the fact that undermines this assertion, at least to me, is the painfully obvious cluster bomb that was "the successor search."  It was so clear to me that Bowlsby had no "short list" of replacements and that the whole process was an inartful scramble, resulting from Bowlsby being caught off guard by Trent taking the $$/job at LSU. If Bowlsby really was planning on pushing Trent out, you'd think he'd have a replacement or two in mind.

Nope.  Instead, we had a prolonged, semi-secret cluster search which supposedly almost resulted in the hiring of Larry Brown.  And there is NO WAY on God's green earth that Larry Brown was on any short list of Bowlsby! 

So in retrospect, I come down on the classic "failure to communicate" between coach and AD that was pretty much "lose/lose."  Yeah, Trent got paid, and I hope he (by all accounts a good man and loyal friend) and his family are happy.  But from a coaching standpoint, his post-Farm career hasn't exactly been stellar.

[jacketree]

Good luck to Coach Montgomery!  I wonder if having meeelions in the bank will compel him to a golf course near you, or into broadcasting?

I'll always think his recruiting gas ran out about the same time Mamlet didn't give him a free pass because he was Mike Montgomery.  18 years is a long time in one place, says the guy who has been at his place 21 years and counting.

Cal is smart to hire a search firm, if only to vet everyone's college degree after than Manhattan guy's clusterbomb going to South Florida.

Jason Kidd has coaching experience now.  Maybe he can turn that baby around 360 degrees....

[jacketree]

Good luck to Coach Montgomery!  I wonder if having meeelions in the bank will compel him to a golf course near you, or into broadcasting?

I'll always think his recruiting gas ran out about the same time Mamlet didn't give him a free pass because he was Mike Montgomery.  18 years is a long time in one place, says the guy who has been at his place 21 years and counting.

Cal is smart to hire a search firm, if only to vet everyone's college degree after than Manhattan guy's clusterbomb going to South Florida.

Jason Kidd has coaching experience now.  Maybe he can turn that baby around 360 degrees....

[OutsiderFan]

As I understand it, Cal's search firm recommended Gary Anderson, the now Wisconsin coach as its #1 choice for the football job.  Depending on who you believe, Wisconsin hired him before Cal could act, or Barbour went against the search firm's recommendation and hired Dykes instead.

In any case, it's hard to imagine Cal fans being too optimistic about the choice for its next hoops coach.

[OutsiderFan]

As I understand it, Cal's search firm recommended Gary Anderson, the now Wisconsin coach as its #1 choice for the football job.  Depending on who you believe, Wisconsin hired him before Cal could act, or Barbour went against the search firm's recommendation and hired Dykes instead.

In any case, it's hard to imagine Cal fans being too optimistic about the choice for its next hoops coach.

[StanFan88]

Stanford needs to name the court after Montgomery - unless they are waiting to name it Van der Veer Court when Tara retires.

[StanFan88]

Stanford needs to name the court after Montgomery - unless they are waiting to name it Van der Veer Court when Tara retires.

[CowboyIndian]

Stanford needs to name the court after Montgomery - unless they are waiting to name it Van der Veer Court when Tara retires.

I was there when Maples opened in the 60s....and even played on the trampoline. I say let's call it "The People's Court".

[CowboyIndian]

Stanford needs to name the court after Montgomery - unless they are waiting to name it Van der Veer Court when Tara retires.

I was there when Maples opened in the 60s....and even played on the trampoline. I say let's call it "The People's Court".

[Treebound]

Teejers,
I agree with you that Trent's departure seemed to be more of a communication issue between Trent and Bob.  I don't believe that Monty would have taken the job from Trent if it were offered.  Trent was his protege and I think Monty was loyal to his people, just as he is trying to set up his current Cal assistant for the HC job with Barbour.    People at the time complained that Bowlsby should have made that swap, but it wasn't going to happen.

71 Bear,
Ralston was an assistant coach at Cal, so that comparison holds no water.  I wouldn't have an issue with an assistant leaving Stanford and going to be a HC at Cal.  Monty made our modern hoops program.    The job he really wanted was Indiana, but luck and timing didn't line up for him.  Barbour and the bears got lucky.  I wish he had gone to LMU (he was ready to sign there) or had waited and replaced Lute at UofA.    UofA or UofI would have been a step up for him in terms of basketball prestige.  That being said, I'm thankful for what he did for Stanford.   

[Treebound]

Teejers,
I agree with you that Trent's departure seemed to be more of a communication issue between Trent and Bob.  I don't believe that Monty would have taken the job from Trent if it were offered.  Trent was his protege and I think Monty was loyal to his people, just as he is trying to set up his current Cal assistant for the HC job with Barbour.    People at the time complained that Bowlsby should have made that swap, but it wasn't going to happen.

71 Bear,
Ralston was an assistant coach at Cal, so that comparison holds no water.  I wouldn't have an issue with an assistant leaving Stanford and going to be a HC at Cal.  Monty made our modern hoops program.    The job he really wanted was Indiana, but luck and timing didn't line up for him.  Barbour and the bears got lucky.  I wish he had gone to LMU (he was ready to sign there) or had waited and replaced Lute at UofA.    UofA or UofI would have been a step up for him in terms of basketball prestige.  That being said, I'm thankful for what he did for Stanford.   

[BostonCard]

I completely disagreed with his move to UCB.  Would John Wooden have gone to University of Spoiled Children ?  No!  He could have picked any other program in the country.  He then became Benedict Monty to me.  I also believe he was trying to work an angle with the AD on his role there before he departed.  I don't know all the details, but something was questioned around comp, I believe.  He tainted his Stanford ties with the move across the Bay.  Yes, I thank him for what he did for our program, but going to our rival was a poor decision.

Well, Rick Pitino went from Kentucky to Louisville.  Does that count as going to your rival?

BC

[BostonCard]

I completely disagreed with his move to UCB.  Would John Wooden have gone to University of Spoiled Children ?  No!  He could have picked any other program in the country.  He then became Benedict Monty to me.  I also believe he was trying to work an angle with the AD on his role there before he departed.  I don't know all the details, but something was questioned around comp, I believe.  He tainted his Stanford ties with the move across the Bay.  Yes, I thank him for what he did for our program, but going to our rival was a poor decision.

Well, Rick Pitino went from Kentucky to Louisville.  Does that count as going to your rival?

BC

[Bruce Wang]

You are aware that Stanford used a search firm to help find Harbaugh, right?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2...-coaching/

Wow.  I had no idea.  Did we use a search firm to hire Dawkins, too?  If so, Stanford needs a refund.

[Bruce Wang]

You are aware that Stanford used a search firm to help find Harbaugh, right?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/chrissmith/2...-coaching/

Wow.  I had no idea.  Did we use a search firm to hire Dawkins, too?  If so, Stanford needs a refund.