Sean Miller

[zonagrad]

How many years did Mark Few fail to get past the Sweet 16 at Gonzaga? They were notorious for blazing through the WCC and flaming out. Still, just one Final Four and that was helped by a 5th year point guard. Arizona’s best players are too good to stay in college more than a few years.

There’s lots of basketball between now and the middle of March. If Arizona stays healthy, they will not be an easy out for anyone, regardless of seed. With three freshmen, consistency is the last piece of the puzzle to fall in place. That’s why this team still struggles to put together a complete 40 minutes. In three months we’ll be in a much different place. It’s clear we have a ton of upside with this team. Every player has room for improvement. I like our chances.

[Chicat]

I am in no way ready to call for Miller being fired. That’s ludicrous to me.

I am in every way ready for Miller to take this program to the next level. And I’ve seen no evidence that’s happening this year. That’s profoundly disappointing to me.

How many more years does he get, Chi? Do the Pac titles and recruiting success merit an open-ended contract at AZ? Is there a higher threshold of success (ie: the FF) he needs to hit at some point? I like Sean Miller. I’ve always been clear about that. I just wonder if a change is needed. 10 years is a long time. And as a program, we’re nearly two decades since our last FF.

Forgetting for a moment that there are NCAA penalties hanging over our heads like the Sword of Damocles which could fall at any moment, thereby accelerating this conversation, the question we have to ask is whether we are better off with CSM at the helm or if there is someone out there that would take the job and take this program to a higher plane.

I honestly don’t know who that person is. Out of all the coaches I can imagine being worthy of a job at UofA AND would take it, at this point I don’t see any who would do a better job. I see some who could do just as good, but I’m inclined to stick with the guy who is here as opposed to upending everything just to make a lateral move.

But please don’t get me wrong. I want desperately for CSM to be the guy who takes us to the highest of heights. I’m rooting for him now, maybe more than ever.

[Beachcat97]

How many years did Mark Few fail to get past the Sweet 16 at Gonzaga? They were notorious for blazing through the WCC and flaming out. Still, just one Final Four and that was helped by a 5th year point guard. Arizona’s best players are too good to stay in college more than a few years.

Is Few being hired at Gonzaga remotely similar to Miller being hired at AZ? Miller inherited an elite program; Few built one of his own.

It's true that it took Few a long time to break through in the tourney (ie: get past the S16), but I don't think you can compare how far he's brought Gonzaga to how far Miller has brought AZ. It's not Miller's fault that he got hired by an elite program. It just means that he had natural advantages that Few didn't.

[CatFanOneMil]

I am in no way ready to call for Miller being fired. That’s ludicrous to me.

I am in every way ready for Miller to take this program to the next level. And I’ve seen no evidence that’s happening this year. That’s profoundly disappointing to me.

What qualifies as "the next level"?

Mark Few has been a head coach for 21 years, Miller for 15...do the math.

Each year its different parts (and lately that includes coaching staff) those parts need to fit into some sort of system...Miller ALWAYS focuses on defense at the beginning because its the one thing that travels, the unfortunate aspect of that is it is NOT a skill freshmen bring to the table...EVER.

Besides learning new rules and new ways of being "reffed" its the luck of the draw each year to get a cohesive team together unless you are rocking the transfer system and foreign stream like Few has been dominating for years (who has also been coaching for about 10 years LONGER than Miller has been at UofA)...

The main reason we love college BB is because of the randomness of it, any year some no-name team can pop up and knock off a #1 seed in the tourney, as much as we like to think there is a formula for winning there simply is not one that does not include massive amounts of LUCK, even Lute admitted this...

Luck is not something you can plan for the BEST you can do is prepare for BAD luck and hope that it does not visit you...

Brandon Ashleys injury...NOT ON MILLER
Triers PED BS...NOT ON MILLER
Brandon WIlliams injury NOT ON MILLER
Rawle Alkins injury NOT ON MILLER
Ray Smith injury NOT ON MILLER
Wisconsin shooting ridiculous three point % NOT ON MILLER

I could go on and on...but without this factor of luck we would not enjoy the game nearly as much...its the reason we watch Derrick Williams punk the hell out of Duke, it was sort of luck in our favor that game...even the natty that we won had an element of luck in it that turned the championship in our favor.

When you can effectively package and incorporate FUCKING LUCK into a coaching strategy you can bitch about us not winning championships...until then every team out there is subject to the randomness.

[Beachcat97]

But please don’t get me wrong. I want desperately for CSM to be the guy who takes us to the highest of heights. I’m rooting for him now, maybe more than ever.

I'm not sure anyone here would disagree with this.

[Chicat]

I am in no way ready to call for Miller being fired. That’s ludicrous to me.

I am in every way ready for Miller to take this program to the next level. And I’ve seen no evidence that’s happening this year. That’s profoundly disappointing to me.

What qualifies as "the next level"?

Mark Few has been a head coach for 21 years, Miller for 15...do the math.

I think we all know what the next level is. Unless for some reason you’re super into getting top-5 recruiting classes but still not making a Final Four.

And I never, not once, compared Few to Miller. Apples to Hand Grenades my man...

As for “luck”, check out the correlation between getting a top seed and making the Final Four. You make it sound like it’s just a random roll of the dice for every team. Not so.

[ChooChooCat]

How many years did Mark Few fail to get past the Sweet 16 at Gonzaga? They were notorious for blazing through the WCC and flaming out. Still, just one Final Four and that was helped by a 5th year point guard. Arizona’s best players are too good to stay in college more than a few years.

Is Few being hired at Gonzaga remotely similar to Miller being hired at AZ? Miller inherited an elite program; Few built one of his own.

It's true that it took Few a long time to break through in the tourney (ie: get past the S16), but I don't think you can compare how far he's brought Gonzaga to how far Miller has brought AZ. It's not Miller's fault that he got hired by an elite program. It just means that he had natural advantages that Few didn't.

I mean it's pretty disingenuous to not point out that Miller built the program back up from death, because that's sure as shit what he did. He was literally left with Nic Wise, Brendon Lavender, Jamelle Horne, Kyle Fogg, and Garland Judkins. It's not as if the program was left to him built for greatness. Mark Few took over what Dan Monson built (led Zaga to the Elite 8) and to be fair in Few's nearly 20 years in charge at Zaga he brought it to heights not seen before, but nonetheless it was left to Few in very good condition by comparison obviously as his first year at the helm Zaga went to the Sweet 16.

[ChooChooCat]

How many years did Mark Few fail to get past the Sweet 16 at Gonzaga? They were notorious for blazing through the WCC and flaming out. Still, just one Final Four and that was helped by a 5th year point guard. Arizona’s best players are too good to stay in college more than a few years.

Herein lies the problem for Arizona under Sean Miller. The guy is literally a victim of his recruiting successes. Obviously you want to recruit the best players you possibly can, but when you recruit so many one and dones, and then replace those one and dones with more one and dones, well unless you have an all time talent like Anthony Davis or have a team full of beyond ridiculous talent, that strategy only takes you so far. When you look at all the recent national championship teams and even the final four teams they all mainly have one thing in common and that's experience or at least experience to go with very good young talent (obviously some Duke & Kentucky teams do not apply here, but we'll never land those type of classes). He's also been a victim of "landing who you can land." In that regards I'm talking about Allonzo Trier, who while talented, especially offensively, he honestly wasn't much of a fit for a Sean Miller type team in any way shape or form. Guy wasn't ever going to be a good defender and hell Miller dropped a guy who honestly better fit him in Tyler Dorsey so he could land two guys more guys who never contributed to Arizona for one reason or another (Ray Smith & Justin Simon). Honestly some of the decisions made by Miller in recruiting have been tragic to say the least and most of them you can't blame him for as they just didn't work out for one reason or another. This year he recruited all the right guys (Armstrong not withstanding), but they're all primary guys who are talented enough to bounce after a year, so once again we're at the mercy of having starting talent without experience and we'll be in that situation again next year and who knows after that.

Sean Miller's best team was made up of a very good upperclassmen transfer PG, a motivated athletic guard who was only around as long as he was because he lacked the size to leave earlier, a transcendent freshman who was absolutely elite athletically and in turn defensively, and two post players who were rated very highly, but weren't cut out for today's NBA, which led to them staying in school longer than either would've liked. Due to our talents' physical limits (size and athletic ability wise) we had a very experienced team very familiar with the system with a transcendent freshman to provide aid. That's honestly the recipe for success and something Sean Miller hasn't been able to duplicate since. If he's able to duplicate it it won't be for another couple of years at the earliest. The fanbase/boosters will have to be patient until then. Once again though you can only land who you can land, so we'll see if it's even a possibility or just a dream to get back to there.

[ralmom22]

Re-watch the last few minutes... if we are going to blame Miller for the rest of them, and laud Few , then the converse is true for the end of the game show of grit, heart, and to my “fan sense” , adjustment of play. We are Sean Miller- and he is us- for better and worse. We are going to lose a few that upsets us in pac play (probably to Altman whom I can’t stand...), however- for the first time since TJ’s last year we all do see glimpses, and at times stretches, of what is needed to go further in March. A lot of you said sweet 16/8 for this team.. now we want to talk about parting ways with Coach if it’s not a final 4?? Stop. Breathe. It is going to take some luck- not just a great recruiting class (do you remember Dukes team/class last year??) and maybe more time than we like. (it’s ok- we aren’t switching teams anyways...) We’ve got more fun- and probably some frustration both on-and off- the court ahead this year- literally it’s not time to freak out- it’s time to Bear Down.

[ChooChooCat]

https://soundcloud.com/user-513749291" target="_blank

Adia Barnes started a podcast and her first guest happens to be Sean. Good interview and not too long either.

[RondaeShimmy]

How many years did Mark Few fail to get past the Sweet 16 at Gonzaga? They were notorious for blazing through the WCC and flaming out. Still, just one Final Four and that was helped by a 5th year point guard. Arizona’s best players are too good to stay in college more than a few years.

Herein lies the problem for Arizona under Sean Miller. The guy is literally a victim of his recruiting successes. Obviously you want to recruit the best players you possibly can, but when you recruit so many one and dones, and then replace those one and dones with more one and dones, well unless you have an all time talent like Anthony Davis or have a team full of beyond ridiculous talent, that strategy only takes you so far. When you look at all the recent national championship teams and even the final four teams they all mainly have one thing in common and that's experience or at least experience to go with very good young talent (obviously some Duke & Kentucky teams do not apply here, but we'll never land those type of classes). He's also been a victim of "landing who you can land." In that regards I'm talking about Allonzo Trier, who while talented, especially offensively, he honestly wasn't much of a fit for a Sean Miller type team in any way shape or form. Guy wasn't ever going to be a good defender and hell Miller dropped a guy who honestly better fit him in Tyler Dorsey so he could land two guys more guys who never contributed to Arizona for one reason or another (Ray Smith & Justin Simon). Honestly some of the decisions made by Miller in recruiting have been tragic to say the least and most of them you can't blame him for as they just didn't work out for one reason or another. This year he recruited all the right guys (Armstrong not withstanding), but they're all primary guys who are talented enough to bounce after a year, so once again we're at the mercy of having starting talent without experience and we'll be in that situation again next year and who knows after that.

Sean Miller's best team was made up of a very good upperclassmen transfer PG, a motivated athletic guard who was only around as long as he was because he lacked the size to leave earlier, a transcendent freshman who was absolutely elite athletically and in turn defensively, and two post players who were rated very highly, but weren't cut out for today's NBA, which led to them staying in school longer than either would've liked. Due to our talents' physical limits (size and athletic ability wise) we had a very experienced team very familiar with the system with a transcendent freshman to provide aid. That's honestly the recipe for success and something Sean Miller hasn't been able to duplicate since. If he's able to duplicate it it won't be for another couple of years at the earliest. The fanbase/boosters will have to be patient until then. Once again though you can only land who you can land, so we'll see if it's even a possibility or just a dream to get back to there.

Agreed

Saw this on reddit ago, recruiting rank and returning scoring %

History says unless you can recruit like Kentucky or Duke, chasing the top recruiting classes won't pay off (they'll be gone in a year or two), and even then it won't work out most of the time.

You have to have an experienced team with lots of returning scorers and add a top freshman or two to complete the team (depth) or to push the team over the hill.

Also to raise both the floor and ceiling of the team.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I figure this won't be a shock, given that people like Rise and Fire have me labeled as president of Miller's fan club, but I don't get dissatisfaction with his performance on the court. Now, if there are behind the scenes personality things I'm not privy to, ok. Also, there's obviously the FBI cloud. But on the court, he produces.

1. People argue about production relative to recruiting. Well, recruiting is part of a coach's job and he is arguably the best we've ever had in that area. Look at Arizona's current NBA talent vs any time period with Lute and it's comparable. We have mainlined talent in a tougher era, because so much is one and done and you carry over very little talent.

2. I don't understand being disappointed with Gonzaga. If you told me before the game how we'd shoot from 3, I would have guaranteed a double digit loss and probably a 20-25 point L. Our biggest strength has been offensive efficiency and shooting, and we were awful.

We played a good game on the glass and defensively for the most part. Miller alluded to it after, but keeping that intensity when shots are missing is tough for a young team. I thought we did well with that vs a very good team. You can't coach shots going in or not. I thought we got fairly decent looks, but some nights they don't go in.

3. In terms of talk about the next level, we're as successful as we've been in the regular season and Pac, and that isn't an accident. The pumping up of Altman and Few comes down to a single Final Four. As I've said before, is Miller all that different as a coach if Horne or York's shots go down?

I disagree with the argument about Miller in big games. Against roughly equal competition as a top team, you should be about .500, and we basically are.

People wanted more offense, and we are producing that this year. The complaints just shift to new things. What people really want is everything at all times and it's not how this works.

[WildcatStunner]

I am in no way ready to call for Miller being fired. That’s ludicrous to me.

I am in every way ready for Miller to take this program to the next level. And I’ve seen no evidence that’s happening this year. That’s profoundly disappointing to me.

That is the perfect summation of where I am at.

[Merkin]

I am in no way ready to call for Miller being fired. That’s ludicrous to me.

I am in every way ready for Miller to take this program to the next level. And I’ve seen no evidence that’s happening this year. That’s profoundly disappointing to me.

That is the perfect summation of where I am at.

Likewise. I haven't caught up on this thread, so this has probably been mentioned, but tired of him relying on one and dones, with poor supporting players.

Really hard to rely on true freshmen to stay consistent the whole season, and if you can't win a single tourney game with the best play in the nation with DeAndre Ayton then you know it's time to revamp your thinking. Get some good 4 year player types like Nick Johnson.

[goslingswagg]

Choo - agree with all your points there regarding Miller sort of being stuck in a similar cycle year-in, year-out for the last 5 years or so w/r/t recruiting. I would also add that I don't think the defensive system we run makes ANY sense when your recruiting philosophy is largely driven by getting 5 star level talents that generally aren't in school very long...I don't know why Miller has struggled to realize that and adapt either his system or his recruiting philosophy, but that issue has been at the heart of our struggles as a program for the last handful of years and is a primary reason we haven't achieved greater tournament success under Miller.

[CalStateTempe]

Choo - agree with all your points there regarding Miller sort of being stuck in a similar cycle year-in, year-out for the last 5 years or so w/r/t recruiting. I would also add that I don't think the defensive system we run makes ANY sense when your recruiting philosophy is largely driven by getting 5 star level talents that generally aren't in school very long...I don't know why Miller has struggled to realize that and adapt either his system or his recruiting philosophy, but that issue has been at the heart of our struggles as a program for the last handful of years and is a primary reason we haven't achieved greater tournament success under Miller.

Great post and summed up what eats at me the most re: Miller as coach.

[Beachcat97]

How many years did Mark Few fail to get past the Sweet 16 at Gonzaga? They were notorious for blazing through the WCC and flaming out. Still, just one Final Four and that was helped by a 5th year point guard. Arizona’s best players are too good to stay in college more than a few years.

Is Few being hired at Gonzaga remotely similar to Miller being hired at AZ? Miller inherited an elite program; Few built one of his own.

It's true that it took Few a long time to break through in the tourney (ie: get past the S16), but I don't think you can compare how far he's brought Gonzaga to how far Miller has brought AZ. It's not Miller's fault that he got hired by an elite program. It just means that he had natural advantages that Few didn't.

I mean it's pretty disingenuous to not point out that Miller built the program back up from death, because that's sure as shit what he did. He was literally left with Nic Wise, Brendon Lavender, Jamelle Horne, Kyle Fogg, and Garland Judkins. It's not as if the program was left to him built for greatness. Mark Few took over what Dan Monson built (led Zaga to the Elite 8) and to be fair in Few's nearly 20 years in charge at Zaga he brought it to heights not seen before, but nonetheless it was left to Few in very good condition by comparison obviously as his first year at the helm Zaga went to the Sweet 16.

Choo: you just compared following Lute Olson (O’Neill and Pennell were rentals) to following Dan Monson. Think about that for a minute. Monson may’ve led Gonzaga to the E8, but our guy took AZ from being irrelevant to one of the top programs in the nation. And if you don’t think Miller benefited from Lute Olson’s legacy, you’re nuts. Even if AZ had a down year or two before Miller arrived, AZ remained a top program at the time Miller was hired. Jeez, that’s part of why Miller would even come here.

But I digress. I already made the case upthread that Few isn’t really Miller’s peer, not in the same way others are. So I don’t like the Few/Miller comparison. Compare Miller to Altman or Beilein instead.

[ChooChooCat]

Choo - agree with all your points there regarding Miller sort of being stuck in a similar cycle year-in, year-out for the last 5 years or so w/r/t recruiting. I would also add that I don't think the defensive system we run makes ANY sense when your recruiting philosophy is largely driven by getting 5 star level talents that generally aren't in school very long...I don't know why Miller has struggled to realize that and adapt either his system or his recruiting philosophy, but that issue has been at the heart of our struggles as a program for the last handful of years and is a primary reason we haven't achieved greater tournament success under Miller.

I think we're all pretty much there my man. In many ways Sean Miller is damned if he does damned if he doesn't in regards to recruiting. He can recruit as well he does because of the name Arizona (along with his own abilities of course), but when you can recruit as well as you do playing a system designed primarily for lesser athletes doesn't really make sense. Now to Miller's credit, he does adapt the packline a bit, but alas it never seems enough.

[ChooChooCat]

How many years did Mark Few fail to get past the Sweet 16 at Gonzaga? They were notorious for blazing through the WCC and flaming out. Still, just one Final Four and that was helped by a 5th year point guard. Arizona’s best players are too good to stay in college more than a few years.

Is Few being hired at Gonzaga remotely similar to Miller being hired at AZ? Miller inherited an elite program; Few built one of his own.

It's true that it took Few a long time to break through in the tourney (ie: get past the S16), but I don't think you can compare how far he's brought Gonzaga to how far Miller has brought AZ. It's not Miller's fault that he got hired by an elite program. It just means that he had natural advantages that Few didn't.

I mean it's pretty disingenuous to not point out that Miller built the program back up from death, because that's sure as shit what he did. He was literally left with Nic Wise, Brendon Lavender, Jamelle Horne, Kyle Fogg, and Garland Judkins. It's not as if the program was left to him built for greatness. Mark Few took over what Dan Monson built (led Zaga to the Elite 8) and to be fair in Few's nearly 20 years in charge at Zaga he brought it to heights not seen before, but nonetheless it was left to Few in very good condition by comparison obviously as his first year at the helm Zaga went to the Sweet 16.

Choo: you just compared following Lute Olson (O’Neill and Pennell were rentals) to following Dan Monson. Think about that for a minute. Monson may’ve led Gonzaga to the E8, but our guy took AZ from being irrelevant to one of the top programs in the nation. And if you don’t think Miller benefited from Lute Olson’s legacy, you’re nuts. Even if AZ had a down year or two before Miller arrived, AZ remained a top program at the time Miller was hired. Jeez, that’s part of why Miller would even come here.

But I digress. I already made the case upthread that Few isn’t really Miller’s peer, not in the same way others are. So I don’t like the Few/Miller comparison. Compare Miller to Altman or Beilein instead.

I never said Miller didn't benefit from Lute's legacy, I merely said that Miller took over what was a literal fricken dumpster fire of a situation and effectively put the fire out after one year. Mark Few took an Elite 8 team that returned pretty much every body and took it to the Sweet 16 the year after and rode the wave of being at the time one of the first well known Cinderellas. One was left with a good situation and the other was not regardless of said past legacy, which didn't exist before the coach he was taking over for.

[pc in NM]

Few will be a hall-of-fame coach.

Miller will be a hall-of-fame coach.

Not much else matters.

K, already a hall-of-fame coach, was saved by poor referring from first week elimination, and then lost in the Great 8, with one of the best recruiting classes in the history of the sport last year.

Shit happens.

IMNSHO, if Miller left by any means other than his own choice (Exception - NCAA shame), U of A would not be able to immediately replace him with a comparable coach....

[ChooChooCat]

IMNSHO, if Miller left by any means other than his own choice (Exception - NCAA shame), U of A would not be able to immediately replace him with a comparable coach....

I'd take that bet.

[pc in NM]

IMNSHO, if Miller left by any means other than his own choice (Exception - NCAA shame), U of A would not be able to immediately replace him with a comparable coach....

I'd take that bet.

Read my signature...

[ChooChooCat]

IMNSHO, if Miller left by any means other than his own choice (Exception - NCAA shame), U of A would not be able to immediately replace him with a comparable coach....

I'd take that bet.

Read my signature...

Lol then what's your definition of a comparable coach exactly?

[PHXCATS]

What a stranger journey we have been on. I wanted Miller gone for years and was ripped for it, now I want him to stay. Now so many want Miller out for the reasons I said I wanted him out years ago. Strange strange times.

I did not watch the Baylor game but I did watch all of the game vs Gonzaga. I still see no reason why the Cats cannot win the conference and make the final four this year.

[Chicat]

What a stranger journey we have been on. I wanted Miller gone for years and was ripped for it, now I want him to stay. Now so many want Miller out for the reasons I said I wanted him out years ago. Strange strange times.

Wait, people are making up fake stories about Miller blaming the fans for the loss?

Hmmm, I must have missed that...

[ChooChooCat]

Now so many want Miller out for the reasons I said I wanted him out years ago.

Who are these "so many?" They're not on this site from what I've seen.

There are concerns, but no one is calling him for to be out.

[cpt]

How many years did Mark Few fail to get past the Sweet 16 at Gonzaga? They were notorious for blazing through the WCC and flaming out. Still, just one Final Four and that was helped by a 5th year point guard. Arizona’s best players are too good to stay in college more than a few years.

Is Few being hired at Gonzaga remotely similar to Miller being hired at AZ? Miller inherited an elite program; Few built one of his own.

It's true that it took Few a long time to break through in the tourney (ie: get past the S16), but I don't think you can compare how far he's brought Gonzaga to how far Miller has brought AZ. It's not Miller's fault that he got hired by an elite program. It just means that he had natural advantages that Few didn't.

I mean it's pretty disingenuous to not point out that Miller built the program back up from death, because that's sure as shit what he did. He was literally left with Nic Wise, Brendon Lavender, Jamelle Horne, Kyle Fogg, and Garland Judkins. It's not as if the program was left to him built for greatness. Mark Few took over what Dan Monson built (led Zaga to the Elite 8) and to be fair in Few's nearly 20 years in charge at Zaga he brought it to heights not seen before, but nonetheless it was left to Few in very good condition by comparison obviously as his first year at the helm Zaga went to the Sweet 16.

Choo: you just compared following Lute Olson (O’Neill and Pennell were rentals) to following Dan Monson. Think about that for a minute. Monson may’ve led Gonzaga to the E8, but our guy took AZ from being irrelevant to one of the top programs in the nation. And if you don’t think Miller benefited from Lute Olson’s legacy, you’re nuts. Even if AZ had a down year or two before Miller arrived, AZ remained a top program at the time Miller was hired. Jeez, that’s part of why Miller would even come here.

But I digress. I already made the case upthread that Few isn’t really Miller’s peer, not in the same way others are. So I don’t like the Few/Miller comparison. Compare Miller to Altman or Beilein instead.

I never said Miller didn't benefit from Lute's legacy, I merely said that Miller took over what was a literal fricken dumpster fire of a situation and effectively put the fire out after one year. Mark Few took an Elite 8 team that returned pretty much every body and took it to the Sweet 16 the year after and rode the wave of being at the time one of the first well known Cinderellas. One was left with a good situation and the other was not regardless of said past legacy, which didn't exist before the coach he was taking over for.

I disagree with the assertion that Arizona was a dumpster fire when Miller took over. Every great coach in the country took a hard look at that vacancy because the foundations of the program are solid: close to California for great recruits, top-tier facilities, top-tier fans, top-tier pay and a tradition as strong as anyone not named Kansas, North Carolina, Kentucky or Duke - and without some of the baggage that comes with one of those blue blood programs. Arizona was a great job when Miller took it and will be a great job when Miller leaves. If we believe we are an elite program, we should expect elite results. And frankly we aren't getting them from Miller. He is on a short leash as far as I'm concerned.

[cpt]

IMNSHO, if Miller left by any means other than his own choice (Exception - NCAA shame), U of A would not be able to immediately replace him with a comparable coach....

I'd take that bet.

Me too. Arizona will be a top job when Miller leaves - for all the reasons I posted before.

[ChooChooCat]

I disagree with the assertion that Arizona was a dumpster fire when Miller took over. Every great coach in the country took a hard look at that vacancy because the foundations of the program are solid: close to California for great recruits, top-tier facilities, top-tier fans, top-tier pay and a tradition as strong as anyone not named Kansas, North Carolina, Kentucky or Duke - and without some of the baggage that comes with one of those blue blood programs. Arizona was a great job when Miller took it and will be a great job when Miller leaves. If we believe we are an elite program, we should expect elite results. And frankly we aren't getting them from Miller. He is on a short leash as far as I'm concerned.

Tim Floyd turned us down and so did Miller at first due to how much work had to be put in to turn every thing back around. I agree with every thing in bold though.

[cpt]

I disagree with the assertion that Arizona was a dumpster fire when Miller took over. Every great coach in the country took a hard look at that vacancy because the foundations of the program are solid: close to California for great recruits, top-tier facilities, top-tier fans, top-tier pay and a tradition as strong as anyone not named Kansas, North Carolina, Kentucky or Duke - and without some of the baggage that comes with one of those blue blood programs. Arizona was a great job when Miller took it and will be a great job when Miller leaves. If we believe we are an elite program, we should expect elite results. And frankly we aren't getting them from Miller. He is on a short leash as far as I'm concerned.

Tim Floyd turned us down and so did Miller at first due to how much work had to be put in to turn every thing back around. I agree with every thing in bold though.

That's on Livengood. Tim Floyd should have never been offered the job. We could have had Altman who was at Creighton at the time and was interested. I wish we would have taken him honestly.

[legallykenny]

Anyone calling for Miller to be fired needs to get the fuck off this board and go join PGU or the Bruins fan base.

Insane the amount of crybabys who do not understand the damn game at all...

Bunch of freshmen, in college fucking finals for the first time ever, and a bunch of second tier older players...(lets not forget they must keep grades up)...its not damn rocket surgery you maroons...lighten the fuck up.

I didn't realize that our opponents' players do not also sit for finals.

The personnel on the floor is a product of the coach's recruiting. At this point it's pretty obvious that Miller is reliant on a recruiting one or two stars a year to cover his ass on the floor and give him the excuse of "inexperience" when he loses and the bench full of recruiting misses and transfer stiffs can't make up the shortcomings. It's getting really hard to watch the product this yields.

[legallykenny]

How many years did Mark Few fail to get past the Sweet 16 at Gonzaga? They were notorious for blazing through the WCC and flaming out. Still, just one Final Four and that was helped by a 5th year point guard. Arizona’s best players are too good to stay in college more than a few years.

Pretty sweet that we're only getting slightly out performed by a mid-major.

[StickItInTheyFace]

“The grass is always greener on the other side--that's because we can't see over the fence."

I know this is overdone, but I cant help but think of it every time after these talk come up following rough losses. These "drop Miller if ____ happens" comments have constantly stumped me. They aren't just gonna fire Miller and figure our a replacement later. There has to be a replacement that we actually think will be better and makes sense.

Tell me a coach that we could get within the next 2 years or so that you would think would:
A. Actually come to Arizona right now
B. Win more than Miller

I'm not saying these coaches don't exist by any means. I just wanna know the names you guys would rather see. I feel like this is always a humbling exercise as I would imagine Arizona wouldn't be dumb enough to fire Miller without having a really really good replacement in mind.

Also, criteria "B" can be taken kind of generally, not just total wins. However, I will say I'm not looking for someone who is gonna bring UConn level tournament runs and regular season anguish. I care more about watching a team I love every season, take shots in the tournament then teams I dread that could make improbable runs. Like almost everyone here, I have never watched and loved this team because they made deep tourney runs.

[ChooChooCat]

“The grass is always greener on the other side--that's because we can't see over the fence."

I know this is overdone, but I cant help but think of it every time after these talk come up following rough losses. These "drop Miller if ____ happens" comments have constantly stumped me. They aren't just gonna fire Miller and figure our a replacement later. There has to be a replacement that we actually think will be better and makes sense.

Tell me a coach that we could get within the next 2 years or so that you would think would:
A. Actually come to Arizona right now
B. Win more than Miller

I'm not saying these coaches don't exist by any means. I just wanna know the names you guys would rather see. I feel like this is always a humbling exercise as I would imagine Arizona wouldn't be dumb enough to fire Miller without having a really really good replacement in mind.

Also, criteria "B" can be taken kind of generally, not just total wins. However, I will say I'm not looking for someone who is gonna bring UConn level tournament runs and regular season anguish. I care more about watching a team I love every season, take shots in the tournament then teams I dread that could make improbable runs. Like almost everyone here, I have never watched and loved this team because they made deep tourney runs.

B. is a fair question, but A.? Wtf would any coach be scared of? Sanctions? Chris Mack took the Louisville job FFS. We're not getting the death penalty. We would have ZERO trouble attracting coaches (that aren't at blue bloods or have won a championship recently).

[Spaceman Spiff]

Anyone calling for Miller to be fired needs to get the fuck off this board and go join PGU or the Bruins fan base.

Insane the amount of crybabys who do not understand the damn game at all...

Bunch of freshmen, in college fucking finals for the first time ever, and a bunch of second tier older players...(lets not forget they must keep grades up)...its not damn rocket surgery you maroons...lighten the fuck up.

I didn't realize that our opponents' players do not also sit for finals.

The personnel on the floor is a product of the coach's recruiting. At this point it's pretty obvious that Miller is reliant on a recruiting one or two stars a year to cover his ass on the floor and give him the excuse of "inexperience" when he loses and the bench full of recruiting misses and transfer stiffs can't make up the shortcomings. It's getting really hard to watch the product this yields.

So stop watching.

Some programs don't recruit stars and don't compete the way we do. I'd say we're spoiled from Lute, but we've won about the same % of Pac championships as we did under Lute's tenure.

Fans have these weird standards with Miller, like it's unacceptable and hard to watch success that's about as good as anyone has ever produced here. Lute's win % was .755, Miller's is .751. Like I said, Pac conference wins are pretty consistent too.

If you don't like watching this, ok. I like watching success.

[PHXCATS]

“The grass is always greener on the other side--that's because we can't see over the fence."

I know this is overdone, but I cant help but think of it every time after these talk come up following rough losses. These "drop Miller if ____ happens" comments have constantly stumped me. They aren't just gonna fire Miller and figure our a replacement later. There has to be a replacement that we actually think will be better and makes sense.

Tell me a coach that we could get within the next 2 years or so that you would think would:
A. Actually come to Arizona right now
B. Win more than Miller

I'm not saying these coaches don't exist by any means. I just wanna know the names you guys would rather see. I feel like this is always a humbling exercise as I would imagine Arizona wouldn't be dumb enough to fire Miller without having a really really good replacement in mind.

Also, criteria "B" can be taken kind of generally, not just total wins. However, I will say I'm not looking for someone who is gonna bring UConn level tournament runs and regular season anguish. I care more about watching a team I love every season, take shots in the tournament then teams I dread that could make improbable runs. Like almost everyone here, I have never watched and loved this team because they made deep tourney runs.

B. is a fair question, but A.? Wtf would any coach be scared of? Sanctions? Chris Mack took the Louisville job FFS. We're not getting the death penalty. We would have ZERO trouble attracting coaches (that aren't at blue bloods or have won a championship recently).

Fred Hoiberg would be the first call I would make after Billy Donovan and Mark Few

[Chicat]

Anyone calling for Miller to be fired needs to get the fuck off this board and go join PGU or the Bruins fan base.

Insane the amount of crybabys who do not understand the damn game at all...

Bunch of freshmen, in college fucking finals for the first time ever, and a bunch of second tier older players...(lets not forget they must keep grades up)...its not damn rocket surgery you maroons...lighten the fuck up.

I didn't realize that our opponents' players do not also sit for finals.

The personnel on the floor is a product of the coach's recruiting. At this point it's pretty obvious that Miller is reliant on a recruiting one or two stars a year to cover his ass on the floor and give him the excuse of "inexperience" when he loses and the bench full of recruiting misses and transfer stiffs can't make up the shortcomings. It's getting really hard to watch the product this yields.

So stop watching.

Some programs don't recruit stars and don't compete the way we do. I'd say we're spoiled from Lute, but we've won about the same % of Pac championships as we did under Lute's tenure.

Fans have these weird standards with Miller, like it's unacceptable and hard to watch success that's about as good as anyone has ever produced here. Lute's win % was .755, Miller's is .751. Like I said, Pac conference wins are pretty consistent too.

If you don't like watching this, ok. I like watching success.

I don’t necessarily disagree, but to my untrained and jaundiced eye, the PAC was significantly better during the Lute years than the Miller years.

Feels like our dominance of the conference should be even more pronounced.

[Merkin]

Hasn't Few turned down Arizona multiple times?

UCLA sure had a heckuva time getting a coach. Didn't 10(?) turn them down?

UCLA has a better tradition, better weather, prettier campus, huge recruiting base, newer arena and so on.

The only thing UCLA doesn't have is the fan support Arizona has.

But I imagine there are a lot of coaches like Miller, mid-majors who win who would gladly take this job.

Travel on a chartered jet, or travel on a bus?

[legallykenny]

Anyone calling for Miller to be fired needs to get the fuck off this board and go join PGU or the Bruins fan base.

Insane the amount of crybabys who do not understand the damn game at all...

Bunch of freshmen, in college fucking finals for the first time ever, and a bunch of second tier older players...(lets not forget they must keep grades up)...its not damn rocket surgery you maroons...lighten the fuck up.

I didn't realize that our opponents' players do not also sit for finals.

The personnel on the floor is a product of the coach's recruiting. At this point it's pretty obvious that Miller is reliant on a recruiting one or two stars a year to cover his ass on the floor and give him the excuse of "inexperience" when he loses and the bench full of recruiting misses and transfer stiffs can't make up the shortcomings. It's getting really hard to watch the product this yields.

So stop watching.

Some programs don't recruit stars and don't compete the way we do. I'd say we're spoiled from Lute, but we've won about the same % of Pac championships as we did under Lute's tenure.

Fans have these weird standards with Miller, like it's unacceptable and hard to watch success that's about as good as anyone has ever produced here. Lute's win % was .755, Miller's is .751. Like I said, Pac conference wins are pretty consistent too.

If you don't like watching this, ok. I like watching success.

Would love to see an RPI adjusted win percentage metric. Even after the last two games we still have an SOS in the 40s.

Sean's teams are generally not enjoyable to watch regardless of whether they win or lose. This year was supposed to be different with Mannion and Green but the grand total of two games they've played against non-awful competition have been trash.

[goslingswagg]

“The grass is always greener on the other side--that's because we can't see over the fence."

I know this is overdone, but I cant help but think of it every time after these talk come up following rough losses. These "drop Miller if ____ happens" comments have constantly stumped me. They aren't just gonna fire Miller and figure our a replacement later. There has to be a replacement that we actually think will be better and makes sense.

Tell me a coach that we could get within the next 2 years or so that you would think would:
A. Actually come to Arizona right now
B. Win more than Miller

I'm not saying these coaches don't exist by any means. I just wanna know the names you guys would rather see. I feel like this is always a humbling exercise as I would imagine Arizona wouldn't be dumb enough to fire Miller without having a really really good replacement in mind.

Also, criteria "B" can be taken kind of generally, not just total wins. However, I will say I'm not looking for someone who is gonna bring UConn level tournament runs and regular season anguish. I care more about watching a team I love every season, take shots in the tournament then teams I dread that could make improbable runs. Like almost everyone here, I have never watched and loved this team because they made deep tourney runs.

B. is a fair question, but A.? Wtf would any coach be scared of? Sanctions? Chris Mack took the Louisville job FFS. We're not getting the death penalty. We would have ZERO trouble attracting coaches (that aren't at blue bloods or have won a championship recently).

Wondering which coaches are out there that we'd potentially be interested in...Craig Smith? Wes Miller? Mike Rhoades? Randy Bennett? Billy Donovan maybe? Matt Painter maybe? I don't see a ton of interesting names to be honest. Not saying I disagree, I think we would absolutely be an attractive job. I just am wondering who I think would have the chance to be more successful here than Miller (and would still be realistic), and don't think there's a ton of names out there right now.

[midnightx]

Anyone calling for Miller to be fired needs to get the fuck off this board and go join PGU or the Bruins fan base.

Insane the amount of crybabys who do not understand the damn game at all...

Bunch of freshmen, in college fucking finals for the first time ever, and a bunch of second tier older players...(lets not forget they must keep grades up)...its not damn rocket surgery you maroons...lighten the fuck up.

I didn't realize that our opponents' players do not also sit for finals.

The personnel on the floor is a product of the coach's recruiting. At this point it's pretty obvious that Miller is reliant on a recruiting one or two stars a year to cover his ass on the floor and give him the excuse of "inexperience" when he loses and the bench full of recruiting misses and transfer stiffs can't make up the shortcomings. It's getting really hard to watch the product this yields.

So stop watching.

Some programs don't recruit stars and don't compete the way we do. I'd say we're spoiled from Lute, but we've won about the same % of Pac championships as we did under Lute's tenure.

Fans have these weird standards with Miller, like it's unacceptable and hard to watch success that's about as good as anyone has ever produced here. Lute's win % was .755, Miller's is .751. Like I said, Pac conference wins are pretty consistent too.

If you don't like watching this, ok. I like watching success.

I don’t necessarily disagree, but to my untrained and jaundiced eye, the PAC was significantly better during the Lute years than the Miller years.

Feels like our dominance of the conference should be even more pronounced.

The winning percentage is one thing, the product on the floor is another. Unlike most of the first half of Miller’s tenure, AZ hasn’t shown up for many big games the past few years (last year was an anomaly for obvious reasons, so I tend not to count it). There is way too much talent on the roster to play so lethargically time and time again. Two major games in back to back weeks and the team was substandard. Lute had some early tournament losses, but he frequently had his teams ready to go during big games during the regular season up until his last full year (that final year is reminiscent of Miller’s last few years, talented teams not showing up). Miller has also had a lot of recruiting misses lately. This class still has potential to be great, unlike the last big one outside of Ayton, but they are going to struggle in the PAC 12 if they don’t get this turned around.

[ChooChooCat]

Hasn't Few turned down Arizona multiple times?

UCLA sure had a heckuva time getting a coach. Didn't 10(?) turn them down?

UCLA has a better tradition, better weather, prettier campus, huge recruiting base, newer arena and so on.

The only thing UCLA doesn't have is the fan support Arizona has.

But I imagine there are a lot of coaches like Miller, mid-majors who win who would gladly take this job.

Travel on a chartered jet, or travel on a bus?

1. Few is never leaving his fly fishing in Spokane.
2. Arizona =/= UCLA. UCLA has tons of warts to the program, namely unreal expectations (they fired Howland shortly after back to back Final Fours and winning the conference and he was there for less than Miller has been here), and an apathetic fanbase, plus ridiculous amounts of local competition for eyeballs. Arizona is a job coaches would want, UCLA has a lot of issues you have to get around. They do not compare.

[ChooChooCat]

Wondering which coaches are out there that we'd potentially be interested in...Craig Smith? Wes Miller? Mike Rhoades? Randy Bennett? Billy Donovan maybe? Matt Painter maybe? I don't see a ton of interesting names to be honest. Not saying I disagree, I think we would absolutely be an attractive job. I just am wondering who I think would have the chance to be more successful here than Miller (and would still be realistic), and don't think there's a ton of names out there right now.

Yeah that's the real question. There's no obvious better replacement outside of Billy D if he'd want to leave the pros. If you move on from Miller you're taking a risk, but that risk isn't being able to attract quality coaches. The risk is which option could do better than Miller.

[Chicat]

Jim Boylen might be available..... again.

[midnightx]

Hasn't Few turned down Arizona multiple times?

UCLA sure had a heckuva time getting a coach. Didn't 10(?) turn them down?

UCLA has a better tradition, better weather, prettier campus, huge recruiting base, newer arena and so on.

The only thing UCLA doesn't have is the fan support Arizona has.

But I imagine there are a lot of coaches like Miller, mid-majors who win who would gladly take this job.

Travel on a chartered jet, or travel on a bus?

Few isn’t leaving, probably for any job. UCLA has historical prestige and is in a great recruiting area, but the job has problems, including some restrictive finances. AZ is still one of the best 2-3 jobs in the west, and probably number one when firing on all cylinders (like it was after Miller’s first few years). It will be attractive to a number of high profile coaches if the timing is right. Billy Donovan would be a great fit. That said, Miller likely isn’t going anywhere unless the team flames out during conference play and loses early in the NCAA tournament.

[Merkin]

I can't imagine any NBA leaving the league to go back to college outside of being fired and needing a job. No NCAA rules, and especially no rigors of recruiting.

Assuming Archie keeps up this year at IU, his name might be in the picture, another Sean clone and the right age.

[StickItInTheyFace]

B. is a fair question, but A.? Wtf would any coach be scared of? Sanctions? Chris Mack took the Louisville job FFS. We're not getting the death penalty. We would have ZERO trouble attracting coaches (that aren't at blue bloods or have won a championship recently).

You're not wrong, I should have clarified. The people who wouldn't come are exactly like you said: already at a blue blood or similar level of program.
The issue for me becomes, when you take those names out. Who is really that appealing? I don't know of anyone out there that I like near as much as Mack and I wasn't ever gonna take Mack over Miller 2 seasons ago.

[84Cat]

How many years did Mark Few fail to get past the Sweet 16 at Gonzaga? They were notorious for blazing through the WCC and flaming out. Still, just one Final Four and that was helped by a 5th year point guard. Arizona’s best players are too good to stay in college more than a few years.

Pretty sweet that we're only getting slightly out performed by a mid-major.

Who is ranked #2 this week

[Spaceman Spiff]

Anyone calling for Miller to be fired needs to get the fuck off this board and go join PGU or the Bruins fan base.

Insane the amount of crybabys who do not understand the damn game at all...

Bunch of freshmen, in college fucking finals for the first time ever, and a bunch of second tier older players...(lets not forget they must keep grades up)...its not damn rocket surgery you maroons...lighten the fuck up.

I didn't realize that our opponents' players do not also sit for finals.

The personnel on the floor is a product of the coach's recruiting. At this point it's pretty obvious that Miller is reliant on a recruiting one or two stars a year to cover his ass on the floor and give him the excuse of "inexperience" when he loses and the bench full of recruiting misses and transfer stiffs can't make up the shortcomings. It's getting really hard to watch the product this yields.

So stop watching.

Some programs don't recruit stars and don't compete the way we do. I'd say we're spoiled from Lute, but we've won about the same % of Pac championships as we did under Lute's tenure.

Fans have these weird standards with Miller, like it's unacceptable and hard to watch success that's about as good as anyone has ever produced here. Lute's win % was .755, Miller's is .751. Like I said, Pac conference wins are pretty consistent too.

If you don't like watching this, ok. I like watching success.

I don’t necessarily disagree, but to my untrained and jaundiced eye, the PAC was significantly better during the Lute years than the Miller years.

Feels like our dominance of the conference should be even more pronounced.

It sort of depends. Lute won a significant # of Pac titles 90-91 and before. At that point, UCLA was down and there wasn't really a clear second level contender.

I would argue that the mid 80's to 90-91, the Pac was at current level or even weaker. UCLA had a bit of a resurgence under Harrick after then.

The last 13 years of Lute's tenure was probably the peak of the Pac, with Stanford making FF runs and UCLA, Oregon and even UW cycling into being contenders. We won 4 of 13 conference titles those years.

[legallykenny]

Anyone calling for Miller to be fired needs to get the fuck off this board and go join PGU or the Bruins fan base.

Insane the amount of crybabys who do not understand the damn game at all...

Bunch of freshmen, in college fucking finals for the first time ever, and a bunch of second tier older players...(lets not forget they must keep grades up)...its not damn rocket surgery you maroons...lighten the fuck up.

I didn't realize that our opponents' players do not also sit for finals.

The personnel on the floor is a product of the coach's recruiting. At this point it's pretty obvious that Miller is reliant on a recruiting one or two stars a year to cover his ass on the floor and give him the excuse of "inexperience" when he loses and the bench full of recruiting misses and transfer stiffs can't make up the shortcomings. It's getting really hard to watch the product this yields.

So stop watching.

Some programs don't recruit stars and don't compete the way we do. I'd say we're spoiled from Lute, but we've won about the same % of Pac championships as we did under Lute's tenure.

Fans have these weird standards with Miller, like it's unacceptable and hard to watch success that's about as good as anyone has ever produced here. Lute's win % was .755, Miller's is .751. Like I said, Pac conference wins are pretty consistent too.

If you don't like watching this, ok. I like watching success.

I don’t necessarily disagree, but to my untrained and jaundiced eye, the PAC was significantly better during the Lute years than the Miller years.

Feels like our dominance of the conference should be even more pronounced.

It sort of depends. Lute won a significant # of Pac titles 90-91 and before. At that point, UCLA was down and there wasn't really a clear second level contender.

I would argue that the mid 80's to 90-91, the Pac was at current level or even weaker. UCLA had a bit of a resurgence under Harrick after then.

The last 13 years of Lute's tenure was probably the peak of the Pac, with Stanford making FF runs and UCLA, Oregon and even UW cycling into being contenders. We won 4 of 13 conference titles those years.

....and went to the NC game in two of the years in which we didn't win the conference.