Sean Miller

[Captain Obvious]

One thing that doesn't help Miller: his brand of basketball is boring.

Well, some of it may be attributable to his offensive philosophy, but some of it has to be the fact that during his tenure because he has only had one decent point guard. One suspects next year's offense will not be limited.

If Miller is still the coach the offense will most certainly be limited. Miller is an expert when it comes to under-utilizing the talent he has and next year will be no different. Once the sanctions get handed down there won't be much talent left for him to mismanage.

[azcat49]

Lot of sting in that post Captain

[Chicat]

In case you were wondering why the Admin would be absolutely fucking brain dead to let Coach Miller go anywhere, I have two bits of evidence...

Those are incredible numbers. The fact that Arizona's profits are greater everyone else's basketball revenue is stunning.

Arizona spends $9M and brings in $23M.
Oregon spends $9M and brings in $11M.
ASSU spends $10M and brings in $8.6M.

[Newportcat]

Great info Chi and essentially in tucson social status revolves around where someone’s season tickets are at mckale. It’s actually a bit crazy that way. We generate so much revenues from those old retired rich fans but we need it badly especially now that our entire athletic department is not profitable

This is another reason why I am so optimistic always about Arizona basketballl. Even if Miller left, we can dramatically over pay for a coach since our program is so profitable and we can not afford it not to be.

Been this way forever and we are a unicorn for a west coast basketball program to generate the revenues we do

I said this elsewhere but zero chance Miller is fired unless a smoking gun comes out. Athletic department fully believes him and that he is not guilty. Just trust me on this as again it’s not my opinion

[PieceOfMeat]

Those numbers reinforce my thoughts on naming rights to McKale being up for sale. (posted over on the football indoor facility thread)

really bugs me mckale is up for sale

Just plain bugs me

You don't sell the namings rights to McKale for less than 3 years of profit. Hell, you don't sell them at all.

[Newportcat]

The purpose of selling naming rights is to finish the construction on mckale and Arizona stadiu

I don’t agree with it but they want to completely redo the side of mckale facing football practice fields . Will cost roughly $50M. Enclosed concourse, massive new entry portal etc. this is why the out the Lute statue on the opposite side

While this is a nice want to have I don’t see how we can generate more revenue from it so why spend that money. McKale now to be is perfect and we aren’t selling higher ticket values or getting better recruits with that front entrance

[zonagrad]

These numbers show why attendance figures are only part of the picture. Yes, Arizona leads the Pac in attendance every year for the last 35 years. But it's the cost of the ticket that is the fine print. Arizona is the priciest ticket in the Pac by far.

I'd like to see what the revenues and profits (??) are for the other programs. Every athlete at the UA should be thankful that the basketball program pays the way for all the other goodies.

[Harvey Specter]

One thing that doesn't help Miller: his brand of basketball is boring.

Well, some of it may be attributable to his offensive philosophy, but some of it has to be the fact that during his tenure because he has only had one decent point guard. One suspects next year's offense will not be limited.

If Miller is still the coach the offense will most certainly be limited. Miller is an expert when it comes to under-utilizing the talent he has and next year will be no different. Once the sanctions get handed down there won't be much talent left for him to mismanage.

Odds are worse than 1-10 that we would hire a coach who will provide better collective results than Miller has (overall results - which involves recruiting AND coaching/ talent utilization). And the assertion that sanctions will be definitively be handed down is equally flawed.

All of us with anonymous handles are wusses to a degree. But it takes a special kind of wussy to have a sock for an anonymous handle.

“Obvious” should be replaced with a different adjective, one that also has 3 syllables - but 2 i’s and 1 o, rather than 2 o’s and 1 i.

[PieceOfMeat]

All of us with anonymous handles are wusses to a degree. But it takes a special kind of wussy to have a sock for an anonymous handle.

Captain Obvious does not appear to be a sock of anyone, from the information I have available.

[ChooChooCat]

The purpose of selling naming rights is to finish the construction on mckale and Arizona stadiu

I don’t agree with it but they want to completely redo the side of mckale facing football practice fields . Will cost roughly $50M. Enclosed concourse, massive new entry portal etc. this is why the out the Lute statue on the opposite side

While this is a nice want to have I don’t see how we can generate more revenue from it so why spend that money. McKale now to be is perfect and we aren’t selling higher ticket values or getting better recruits with that front entrance

I still can't believe we haven't sold the naming rights of either McKale or AZ Stadium to a local credit union or something.

[Newportcat]

These numbers show why attendance figures are only part of the picture. Yes, Arizona leads the Pac in attendance every year for the last 35 years. But it's the cost of the ticket that is the fine print. Arizona is the priciest ticket in the Pac by far.

I'd like to see what the revenues and profits (??) are for the other programs. Every athlete at the UA should be thankful that the basketball program pays the way for all the other goodies.

Totally right. My dad’s cousin still has great seats and they are really pricey. I know someone who has great seats for usc basketball and they seem to be a 1/5 of the costs

Arizona football is the exact opposite, we have the cheapest tickets in the PAC 12

Effectively everything about Arizona basketball and football is the opposite of each other

Basketball, so many structural factors in our favor. And most importantly we as fans do everything possible to ensure our program is very profitable which puts us in a position to always be in a strong position because money always talk and we will always be able to pay a coach wel

It’s why I will always have an optimistic long term view of Arizona basketball as I personally see no way fans stop coming unless we really fuck things up which is tough to see as again we can dramatically overpay a lot of our competition. It’s also why ever believing Arizona football will be good is fools gold. Nothing works in our favor or anywhere close to it.

It’s also why every AD comes to Arizona and quickly realizes that our basketball revenues are fully baked and only way to make a dramatic difference is increasing football revenues because from a technical perspective there appears to be a lot of room

In reality there is not, snowbirds don’t give a shit about football and no heirarchy or social status gains for getting better tickets for football. Heck most snowbirds aren’t even in Tucson for majority of football season. So then you are needing regular fans but regular Tucson locals typically are not wealthy are able to afford expensive football tickets.

[azcat49]

Getting the city to buy in and build a 18k multi function event center with life suites where we can play a half dozen games or so might increase revenue. We could rent it for those games like we do Hi Corbett.

[Newportcat]

One thing that doesn't help Miller: his brand of basketball is boring.

Well, some of it may be attributable to his offensive philosophy, but some of it has to be the fact that during his tenure because he has only had one decent point guard. One suspects next year's offense will not be limited.

If Miller is still the coach the offense will most certainly be limited. Miller is an expert when it comes to under-utilizing the talent he has and next year will be no different. Once the sanctions get handed down there won't be much talent left for him to mismanage.

Odds are worse than 1-10 that we would hire a coach who will provide better collective results than Miller has (overall results - which involves recruiting AND coaching/ talent utilization). And the assertion that sanctions will be definitively be handed down is equally flawed.

All of us with anonymous handles are wusses to a degree. But it takes a special kind of wussy to have a sock for an anonymous handle.

“Obvious” should be replaced with a different adjective, one that also has 3 syllables - but 2 i’s and 1 o, rather than 2 o’s and 1 i.

Harvey Harvey Harvey...been a while since I have called you out

First odds are not worse then 1-10 that we would hire a coach who would produce better then Miller. Last four years we will have won 2 tournament games. You act like it is all but certain if Miller wasn’t here we would hire a terrible coach. Given the profitability of our program and the desperate need to maintain that, we can over pay for a coach. That alone will make some one like a Chris beard take a hard look at us.

We are also one of the few basketball only schools around. And we are a true basketball school. Even Chris beard is second fiddle to football at Tech. So is Rick Barnes, etc.

I have no concerns if Miller were no longer our coach about our long term ability to stay relevant. So many major things would need to change but some are impossible at this point including our facilities, snowbirds coming to Tucson, lack of professional sports in Tucson, our nba tradition. Those things are set in stone and major advantages for whoever is coaching for us.

You act like if Miller left or was fired or quit our program would crumble. Simply not true. We are an extremely attractive job in large part as our fan support is really unmatched on the west coast.

Also, I think it’s dumb to say someone is a sock because they don’t love Miller or would like a change. It’s a perfectly normal opinion given where we currently stand. This is not 2015. A lot of Miller’s shine has worn through. I know tons of fans who would love to see a change made. I don’t think they are crazy.

I don’t have a major opinion on it because I know athletic department is not firing unless there is a smoking gun which no one knows at this point. If I controlled things I would probably fire him and hire Luke but that’s me.

But I don’t think because someone doesn’t like Miller they are a sock account. They are a frustrated Arizona fan which is understandable given past couple of years.

[Newportcat]

Getting the city to buy in and build a 18k multi function event center with life suites where we can play a half dozen games or so might increase revenue. We could rent it for those games like we do Hi Corbett.

They looked into it but too expensive. That’s why city re-did Tucson convention Center

[RawleArenas]

One thing that doesn't help Miller: his brand of basketball is boring.

Well, some of it may be attributable to his offensive philosophy, but some of it has to be the fact that during his tenure because he has only had one decent point guard. One suspects next year's offense will not be limited.

If Miller is still the coach the offense will most certainly be limited. Miller is an expert when it comes to under-utilizing the talent he has and next year will be no different. Once the sanctions get handed down there won't be much talent left for him to mismanage.

Odds are worse than 1-10 that we would hire a coach who will provide better collective results than Miller has (overall results - which involves recruiting AND coaching/ talent utilization). And the assertion that sanctions will be definitively be handed down is equally flawed.

All of us with anonymous handles are wusses to a degree. But it takes a special kind of wussy to have a sock for an anonymous handle.

“Obvious” should be replaced with a different adjective, one that also has 3 syllables - but 2 i’s and 1 o, rather than 2 o’s and 1 i.

Harvey Harvey Harvey...been a while since I have called you out

First odds are not worse then 1-10 that we would hire a coach who would produce better then Miller. Last four years we will have won 2 tournament games. You act like it is all but certain if Miller wasn’t here we would hire a terrible coach. Given the profitability of our program and the desperate need to maintain that, we can over pay for a coach. That alone will make some one like a Chris beard take a hard look at us.

We are also one of the few basketball only schools around. And we are a true basketball school. Even Chris beard is second fiddle to football at Tech. So is Rick Barnes, etc.

I have no concerns if Miller were no longer our coach about our long term ability to stay relevant. So many major things would need to change but some are impossible at this point including our facilities, snowbirds coming to Tucson, lack of professional sports in Tucson, our nba tradition. Those things are set in stone and major advantages for whoever is coaching for us.

You act like if Miller left or was fired or quit our program would crumble. Simply not true. We are an extremely attractive job in large part as our fan support is really unmatched on the west coast.

Also, I think it’s dumb to say someone is a sock because they don’t love Miller or would like a change. It’s a perfectly normal opinion given where we currently stand. This is not 2015. A lot of Miller’s shine has worn through. I know tons of fans who would love to see a change made. I don’t think they are crazy.

I don’t have a major opinion on it because I know athletic department is not firing unless there is a smoking gun which no one knows at this point. If I controlled things I would probably fire him and hire Luke but that’s me.

But I don’t think because someone doesn’t like Miller they are a sock account. They are a frustrated Arizona fan which is understandable given past couple of years.

Newport, Harvey's right. The reason why you have so much confidence concerning the future of our program is largely due to Sean Miller. You've mentioned before that Miller was able to recruit better when he got here, a lot of that had to do with the fact that Miller is a great coach. He had to have some momentum before he started to attract McDonald's type players. They didn't start coming on day one. Miller has played at a high level, has coached at a high level and had done more with less before he came to Tucson. He even has a nice coaching tree with Archie at Indiana, Chris Mack at Louisville and Pasternack at UCSB.

We haven't had a losing program in over thirty years; that alone gives you the feeling that the program runs on autopilot. It doesn't. UNLV has the same FF and championship record that we do and they're still looking for solid coaches. And as a recruit, I would much rather be in Vegas than in Tucson. There are many destination stops that are better than Tucson like Westwood, Austin, Baton Rouge even Nashville is better than what Tucson has to offer.

You make it seem like we are the only school that has money to offer a big coach. Again, our fan base can be so clueless. How long have you been watching basketball? UCLA has way more money than we do, Stanford has money, heck even Cal could throw tons of money at a coach if someone like Billy Donovan was available and was interested. Pretty much any former blue blood has the money to pony up for a great coach if he ever came along.

Someone said it before on this board and it bears repeating: there are not enough elite coaches to fill the slots for elite programs (or programs that falsely believe that they are elite). All it takes is one bad coaching hire and one bad recruiting cycle for our program to fall off the map. Stanford and Cal used to have great, great programs, and they are FAR more poised to hire the type coaches that we think we can get if we ever made a change.

Too many fans live in an Austin Power's delusional world, where they relive the glories and expectations of past generations. The UofA is not the only school that I've been to. One of my former schools hired THREE coaches that went on to win national championships at other schools, and after the coaches left the program was never the same.

As long as we are a top 10-15 program and win a bunch of games, and continue to attract top talent and have them perform well in the pros, we'll be fine. The FF's will come. Short of that, I wouldn't make any changes at all.
When I hear argument like yours I'm reminded of this clip. While it doesn't discuss basketball matters, it appropriately captures the myopia that has consumed our fanbase.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPHSXUS0_1c" target="_blank

[Newportcat]

I just disagree and to me all your logic is majorly flawed

The reason I am optimistic about Arizona basketball is what Lute built here. It’s something special. Most importantly Miller proved we are not a one hit wonder.

UNLV is not a good example as they are not in a major conference and were more a product of Tark being beyond dirty. Now they also have major sports teams and UNLV basketball is nowhere close to the only game in town

UCLA typically has not had the money to outpay us. Maybe they do this time around. But there biggest problem is they can’t get fans to spend lots of money on season tickets anymore as evidence for how much more profitable we are. Pauley is a giant pain the ass to get to for a Thursday night game at 7pm. They also have a delusional fan base still clinging to the wooden days.

Cal and Stanford have no where close to the money as we do and those are terrible examples. Zero chance billy Donovan would ever turn down Arizona for Cal or Stanford. Beyond zero.

Arizona basketball has major boosters who will step up and do what it takes to get things done. Our facilities are better then a lot of NBA teams. We will play the recruiting game as much as we need to.

Recruits love attention. When a recruit comes to Tucson they are a god. When a recruit goes to Baton Rouge they are a no one since they don’t play football. Same in Austin or many of those other places you mentioned. You ever been to Lexington or Durham or Lawrence or east Lansing or heck even Spokane, all basically pits. But when you play basketball in one of those places you are a god. Same as Tucson

Jesus, you guys act like the world will collapse if Sean Miller left. Would there be a transition period of course but Arizona basketball in the long term will be fine. We have too many structural advantages with profitability being a major one. Money can solve a lot of problems and our program makes lots of money. It has for a very long time and it is so difficult for me to see that changing. All the other programs you mentioned have never had the profitability we have had.

[azcat49]

Keep Miller and never hire Walton. That almost seems like a joke. Shouldn’t matter as we need Miller here to deliver that #1 class next year then we can see where the dust settles.

We would get a good coach but would he be the complete package that Miller is. Hard to say. Indiana absUCLA have been looking gor “that” coach forever it seems. We would not pull an elite coach from an elite program so we would probably get what Miller was at X. That role of the five is not one I would like to take anytime soon

[RawleArenas]

I just disagree and to me all your logic is majorly flawed

The reason I am optimistic about Arizona basketball is what Lute built here. It’s something special. Most importantly Miller proved we are not a one hit wonder.

UNLV is not a good example as they are not in a major conference and were more a product of Tark being beyond dirty. Now they also have major sports teams and UNLV basketball is nowhere close to the only game in town

UCLA typically has not had the money to outpay us. Maybe they do this time around. But there biggest problem is they can’t get fans to spend lots of money on season tickets anymore as evidence for how much more profitable we are. Pauley is a giant pain the ass to get to for a Thursday night game at 7pm. They also have a delusional fan base still clinging to the wooden days.

Cal and Stanford have no where close to the money as we do and those are terrible examples. Zero chance billy Donovan would ever turn down Arizona for Cal or Stanford. Beyond zero.

Arizona basketball has major boosters who will step up and do what it takes to get things done. Our facilities are better then a lot of NBA teams. We will play the recruiting game as much as we need to.

Recruits love attention. When a recruit comes to Tucson they are a god. When a recruit goes to Baton Rouge they are a no one since they don’t play football. Same in Austin or many of those other places you mentioned. You ever been to Lexington or Durham or Lawrence or east Lansing or heck even Spokane, all basically pits. But when you play basketball in one of those places you are a god. Same as Tucson

Jesus, you guys act like the world will collapse if Sean Miller left. Would there be a transition period of course but Arizona basketball in the long term will be fine. We have too many structural advantages with profitability being a major one. Money can solve a lot of problems and our program makes lots of money. It has for a very long time and it is so difficult for me to see that changing. All the other programs you mentioned have never had the profitability we have had.

Just repeating baseless talking points ad nauseum does not make them true. Do you follow any other programs? UCLA has major boosters. Stanford has an endowment in the billions, in addition to major alumni who could easily become boosters if they wanted to. The thing is, those schools have so much going for them they don't have to focus on basketball. We do.

We don't have their academic reputation, nor desired locale. I'm thinking like a business man, you're thinking like a sentimental fan. Tons of schools have money, and if you haven't noticed anyone that knows sport knows exactly where Arizona is on the food chain, and it's not as high as people think. Profitability wont matter if we aren't winning. Program success is very fragile. UCLA deserves all the success and more than we could ever hope for. That school has real structural advantages. They have Westbrook, Love, Lonzo and bunch of other guys in the league. They also have a strong alumni base. I don't know what kind of structural advantages you're talking about.

Getting rid of a guy who had one of the top winning percentages in college basketball, the best record at home in the nation, back to back generational bigs and top recruiting class so that you can amuse yourself with a trendy pick like Walton? Sorry no one with any sense is going to sign off on that.

[Newportcat]

You are not thinking like a business person

Not even close. Not even remotely close. You lack a complete understating for how things work

Its clear you think UCLA is a much better job then Arizona even though we are far more profitable

Remind me not to take stock picks from you

[ByJoveByJingle]

{Puts on annoying professor hat}
You guys are just tapping into the age old debate in social sciences over structure versus agency (structuralism vs methodological individualism). Do societal structures dictate success or failure, or does individual will and action dictate the course of the future? Do individual human actors make/change history . . . or are they merely passengers on the tide of world events?

{Longhorned opens his briefcase, pulls out his notes and clears his throat. . . }

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structure_and_agency" target="_blank

There is probably a third way of thinking that bridges this dialectic . . . but why try to take the reasonable middle ground in these troubled times? Everybody mount up and loosen your swords!

[Newportcat]

Interesting

I do think there is risk anytime a coaching change is made for sure but I am much less concerned about our long term future now then I was when Lute left. To me the debate you mention was much more applicable then. I think it is obvious now that our program is not a one trick pony and we have structural benefits around our program that will help any coach long term.

Coaching basketball at Arizona does not guarantee success but we as a program do nothing wrong to hurt those chances of success outside of the current crap that is the PAC 12 conference. We do everything right to put ourselves in a position to be successful which gives me comfort we can weather a lot of storms. That’s why I would not say the chances are less then 1 in 10 we would hire a better coach then Miller if he left or was fired. I view Arizona as a very good job because when you talk to anyone in or around college basketball they would all agree with that.

I am also not convinced as much that Miller is an elite coach. Next year is going to tell us a lot because right now the trend is definitely not good for our program.

[Spaceman Spiff]

You are not thinking like a business person

Not even close. Not even remotely close. You lack a complete understating for how things work

Its clear you think UCLA is a much better job then Arizona even though we are far more profitable

Remind me not to take stock picks from you

I'd argue recruits don't think like business people either (insert paying players joke). Things like proximity to home matter.

That's the thing with UCLA. They're the biggest program in a state loaded with talent. If you recruit in state well and coach that talent halfway decently, you should be a perennial NCAA team. Those recruiting edges overcome money.

Arizona's profitability ultimately just subsidizes sports that operate at a loss. I mean, I think we're a very good job, but our revenue advantage on UCLA isn't a great reason to claim we are better than UCLA. Their main advantages are location and prestige.

[Beachcat97]

Arizona's profitability ultimately just subsidizes sports that operate at a loss. I mean, I think we're a very good job, but our revenue advantage on UCLA isn't a great reason to claim we are better than UCLA. Their main advantages are location and prestige

True, but one could argue that AZ has as good a location and as much prestige as UCLA. Tucson is a stone’s throw from SoCal, a little farther from NoCal, and more and more elite recruits have been coming out of AZ (Bagley and Mannion, just to name a couple recent ones). AZ is also a short plane ride to other western recruiting hotbeds in WA and OR. And as far as prestige, AZ has produced nearly as many pros as UCLA recently. Lonzo has really been their only truly top tier player recently, whereas we’ve had multiple lottery picks (and the #1 overall pick in Ayton).

This is all to say: I don’t think the difference between the AZ and UCLA jobs is all that big, and there are likely quite a few coaches who would prefer AZ’s robust fan support and top billing in Tucson. At AZ, you’re the biggest fist in a relatively small aquarium. In L.A., you’re not only a much smaller fish but chances are most locals don’t even know your name.

[Merkin]

UCLA's Under Armour deal substantially better than Arizona's Nike deal. Arizona gets no cash, and only $2.3M for uniforms and equipment each year.

UCLA received $15M cash up front when they signed, along with $11M cash per year along with uniforms and building upgrade money.

[Beachcat97]

Four Pac teams have better '19 classes than UCLA. Four. So sure, they've got a sweet deal with Under Armour and they won titles in the 70s, but I'm just not seeing what it's gotten them.

Newport has made some excellent points above about the relative strength and promise of the AZ program and brand. We're possibly in better shape now than when Lute retired. Think about that.

The reality is that AZ and UCLA should both be doing way, way better than they are. We've seen what happens at these programs when all the pieces are in places (good coach, solid assistant staff, recruiting momentum, good roster management). They're both national contenders. Oregon too. UCLA has got to make a good hire this time around. They've gotta go all in on a big fish, like Bennett, and pray that they land their top choice.

We're in a very different place because we're heading into a promising season with a proven coach. If Miller wins a Pac title and does well in next year's tournament, we'll be right back where we were a few years ago before anyone knew who Mark Schlabach was.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Arizona's profitability ultimately just subsidizes sports that operate at a loss. I mean, I think we're a very good job, but our revenue advantage on UCLA isn't a great reason to claim we are better than UCLA. Their main advantages are location and prestige

True, but one could argue that AZ has as good a location and as much prestige as UCLA. Tucson is a stone’s throw from SoCal, a little farther from NoCal, and more and more elite recruits have been coming out of AZ (Bagley and Mannion, just to name a couple recent ones). AZ is also a short plane ride to other western recruiting hotbeds in WA and OR. And as far as prestige, AZ has produced nearly as many pros as UCLA recently. Lonzo has really been their only truly top tier player recently, whereas we’ve had multiple lottery picks (and the #1 overall pick in Ayton).

This is all to say: I don’t think the difference between the AZ and UCLA jobs is all that big, and there are likely quite a few coaches who would prefer AZ’s robust fan support and top billing in Tucson. At AZ, you’re the biggest fist in a relatively small aquarium. In L.A., you’re not only a much smaller fish but chances are most locals don’t even know your name.

I'm not criticizing Arizona. UCLA is in the actual city that produces a lot of talent. I don't think the ability to sell pros is hugely different. UCLA still has guys like Love and Westbrook.

I'm just saying the profitability of the program isn't why people think UCLA is a good job. The built in recruiting advantages are the dominant one. Look at history, UCLA has had different success levels, but even their worse coaches have recruited well. It's hard to miss at UCLA.

[EVCat]

I think those that undervalue Sean Miller overvalue the results of the last two years, most notably involving the NCAA Tournament.

You can easily mitigate the case against Sean Miller's 2019 results with the loss of recruiting and the constant negativity around the program involving what may be a lot of bullshit.

2018 had the FBI/Book issue, which absolutely impacted players, hovering over the program all year, then the ESPN/Wiretap story right at the end of the season to cause distraction at a high degree. But the team still got it together to win the PAC regular season and tournament title. The Buffalo loss was the same issue as the Wichita State loss...lack of ability, against a quick, guard-oriented team, to get into the offense closer than from 30 feet. The post gets taken away, as does motion, when your PG can't start the offense a reasonable passing length from the post or cutters. They both pushed us way out, and Buffalo has proven to have been legit.

I always thought the talk about us struggling against the zone was a bit overstated last year, because I feared way more a team that played aggressive man-to-man. The zone allowed PJC to walk the ball into the offense...

So, a favorite talking point that lands on Miller's head...having PJC as the point guard/failure to recruit someone to take that job. And that is 100% fair criticism, though we know he was, to an extent, strong-armed into not recruiting over the top of PJC.

Miller's teams were always considered to be well coached and developed until recently. I doubt he forgot how to coach. And recruiting is a big part of college coaching. The one-and-done does wreak havoc on a team, and senior transfers are so hit and miss. I have a hard time looking at the last two years as coaching failures. Prior to that, a crazy last 2 minutes vs Xavier in yet another 2nd weekend trip, and the Wichita State game, were the issues. When shit wasn't hitting the fan with the ESPN/FBI stuff, Miller was a 2nd weekend coach on average. He averaged a Sweet 16 every year as our coach. He took us from the abyss to an Elite Eight in year 2, and 3 Elite Eights in 5 years, with only one of those E8 losses seeing us as the favorite, and only by a single point on the spread.

That level coach just isn't found on the open market unless you can convince an elite coach, like Calipari, to come to your school. Short of that kind of steal, a coach that does what Miller has done here is not an easy, or even likely, find.

The last two years have been a shit storm, and it is incredibly difficult to gauge the impact to the season all that shit had. Yes, you can blame Miller, in part, for that, but if we are talking about Miller going forward as a coach, we are talking about that shit being in the rearview. So look at where we were when he came in, and what he has built here from 2010 to 2017.

[cpt]

Sean Miller needs Arizona more than Arizona needs Sean Miller. It's been that way from the beginning and its that way now. Arizona is a top 10 job, maybe a top 5 job. Is Sean Miller a top 10 coach? Right now, I'd say nope. And not over his tenure either. He's a top 10 recruiter for sure. But even when he gets top classes the teams underachieve. They can't beat a zone. The offense is boooorrrring. They can't PLAY a zone defense - even when matched up against a team where a zone would be the best strategy. Miller has next year to prove me wrong (and most of the rest of the fan base). I'm not all-in on Sean Miller - at all.

[CatFanOneMil]

Sean Miller needs Arizona more than Arizona needs Sean Miller. It's been that way from the beginning and its that way now. Arizona is a top 10 job, maybe a top 5 job. Is Sean Miller a top 10 coach? Right now, I'd say nope. And not over his tenure either. He's a top 10 recruiter for sure. But even when he gets top classes the teams underachieve. They can't beat a zone. The offense is boooorrrring. They can't PLAY a zone defense - even when matched up against a team where a zone would be the best strategy. Miller has next year to prove me wrong (and most of the rest of the fan base). I'm not all-in on Sean Miller - at all.

Ummm someone didn't do the math: divide his overall record by years doing it and compare with other active coaches you consider to be top 10 in the same time frame and get back to me with the actual data...

I'll wait.

Miller consistently OVERPERFORMS in this metric.

Who you gonna call? The field of 64 coaches is a completely different ballgame than the teams they coach.

[ChooChooCat]

Arizona's profitability ultimately just subsidizes sports that operate at a loss. I mean, I think we're a very good job, but our revenue advantage on UCLA isn't a great reason to claim we are better than UCLA. Their main advantages are location and prestige.

Yeah, but eh. Their true recruiting advantage is primarily being the big brand UnderArmour school, much like it used to be the big west coast brand Adidas school. Our advantage is similar with Nike. I will say the strength of the recruiter does matter as we gave more competition by being a Nike school however.

[cpt]

Sean Miller needs Arizona more than Arizona needs Sean Miller. It's been that way from the beginning and its that way now. Arizona is a top 10 job, maybe a top 5 job. Is Sean Miller a top 10 coach? Right now, I'd say nope. And not over his tenure either. He's a top 10 recruiter for sure. But even when he gets top classes the teams underachieve. They can't beat a zone. The offense is boooorrrring. They can't PLAY a zone defense - even when matched up against a team where a zone would be the best strategy. Miller has next year to prove me wrong (and most of the rest of the fan base). I'm not all-in on Sean Miller - at all.

Ummm someone didn't do the math: divide his overall record by years doing it and compare with other active coaches you consider to be top 10 in the same time frame and get back to me with the actual data...

I'll wait.

Miller consistently OVERPERFORMS in this metric.

Who you gonna call? The field of 64 coaches is a completely different ballgame than the teams they coach.

Right. In the Pac 12. Don't compare records of a coach in this league against the others.

[cpt]

Sean Miller needs Arizona more than Arizona needs Sean Miller. It's been that way from the beginning and its that way now. Arizona is a top 10 job, maybe a top 5 job. Is Sean Miller a top 10 coach? Right now, I'd say nope. And not over his tenure either. He's a top 10 recruiter for sure. But even when he gets top classes the teams underachieve. They can't beat a zone. The offense is boooorrrring. They can't PLAY a zone defense - even when matched up against a team where a zone would be the best strategy. Miller has next year to prove me wrong (and most of the rest of the fan base). I'm not all-in on Sean Miller - at all.

Ummm someone didn't do the math: divide his overall record by years doing it and compare with other active coaches you consider to be top 10 in the same time frame and get back to me with the actual data...

I'll wait.

Miller consistently OVERPERFORMS in this metric.

Who you gonna call? The field of 64 coaches is a completely different ballgame than the teams they coach.

Right. In the Pac 12. Don't compare records of a coach in this league against the others.

And in addition to that...we have year in-year out one of the worst non-conference schedules of any so called top 20 team. Hell, ASU's schedule kicks our ass.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Sean Miller needs Arizona more than Arizona needs Sean Miller. It's been that way from the beginning and its that way now. Arizona is a top 10 job, maybe a top 5 job. Is Sean Miller a top 10 coach? Right now, I'd say nope. And not over his tenure either. He's a top 10 recruiter for sure. But even when he gets top classes the teams underachieve. They can't beat a zone. The offense is boooorrrring. They can't PLAY a zone defense - even when matched up against a team where a zone would be the best strategy. Miller has next year to prove me wrong (and most of the rest of the fan base). I'm not all-in on Sean Miller - at all.

It's odd seeing recruiting separated from the remainder of coaching. You can't think someone underperforms with Miller's tourney results unless he is scoring absolutely top shelf talent.

Also, by underachieving, you have to be using a metric for solely looking at the NCAA tourney. We've dominated the Pac pretty consistently before this year. Our OOC winning has been fine.

That's sort of why I think what I do about what will happen if the fire Miller crowd gets its way. It's almost certain to come at a downgrade in quality. I can't see a straighfaced argument someone else will recruit better than Miller has. So, we're basically counting on a new coach to do more with less...which is a recipe for teaching us how hard that actually is.

[EVCat]

home non-conference maybe.

Actual games played out of conference? Arizona's participation in the Bahamas last year and Maui this year are out of conference games.

KU scheduled ASU when they were a walkover. That won't happen again, just like top teams won't play home and homes with us. Teams like Duke, UNC, etc, don't leave their home state for most of their OOC. Neutral site games are where you get to play them.

[EVCat]

Sean Miller needs Arizona more than Arizona needs Sean Miller. It's been that way from the beginning and its that way now. Arizona is a top 10 job, maybe a top 5 job. Is Sean Miller a top 10 coach? Right now, I'd say nope. And not over his tenure either. He's a top 10 recruiter for sure. But even when he gets top classes the teams underachieve. They can't beat a zone. The offense is boooorrrring. They can't PLAY a zone defense - even when matched up against a team where a zone would be the best strategy. Miller has next year to prove me wrong (and most of the rest of the fan base). I'm not all-in on Sean Miller - at all.

It's odd seeing recruiting separated from the remainder of coaching. You can't think someone underperforms with Miller's tourney results unless he is scoring absolutely top shelf talent.

Also, by underachieving, you have to be using a metric for solely looking at the NCAA tourney. We've dominated the Pac pretty consistently before this year. Our OOC winning has been fine.

That's sort of why I think what I do about what will happen if the fire Miller crowd gets its way. It's almost certain to come at a downgrade in quality. I can't see a straighfaced argument someone else will recruit better than Miller has. So, we're basically counting on a new coach to do more with less...which is a recipe for teaching us how hard that actually is.

Also, up to 2016, Miller had lost exactly one game to a lower seed in his tournament career...as a 1 seed vs a 2 seed after losing a starter at 22-0. And that was a 1.5 point spread.

This program was in the abyss when he took over, looking at, what...Jim Boylen or Tim Floyd if Miller hadn't changed his mind? Thinking we can just dial up a huge name if we let Miller go, which would have us in the abyss again, is disproven by recent history.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Sean Miller needs Arizona more than Arizona needs Sean Miller. It's been that way from the beginning and its that way now. Arizona is a top 10 job, maybe a top 5 job. Is Sean Miller a top 10 coach? Right now, I'd say nope. And not over his tenure either. He's a top 10 recruiter for sure. But even when he gets top classes the teams underachieve. They can't beat a zone. The offense is boooorrrring. They can't PLAY a zone defense - even when matched up against a team where a zone would be the best strategy. Miller has next year to prove me wrong (and most of the rest of the fan base). I'm not all-in on Sean Miller - at all.

It's odd seeing recruiting separated from the remainder of coaching. You can't think someone underperforms with Miller's tourney results unless he is scoring absolutely top shelf talent.

Also, by underachieving, you have to be using a metric for solely looking at the NCAA tourney. We've dominated the Pac pretty consistently before this year. Our OOC winning has been fine.

That's sort of why I think what I do about what will happen if the fire Miller crowd gets its way. It's almost certain to come at a downgrade in quality. I can't see a straighfaced argument someone else will recruit better than Miller has. So, we're basically counting on a new coach to do more with less...which is a recipe for teaching us how hard that actually is.

Also, up to 2016, Miller had lost exactly one game to a lower seed in his tournament career...as a 1 seed vs a 2 seed after losing a starter at 22-0. And that was a 1.5 point spread.

This program was in the abyss when he took over, looking at, what...Jim Boylen or Tim Floyd if Miller hadn't changed his mind? Thinking we can just dial up a huge name if we let Miller go, which would have us in the abyss again, is disproven by recent history.

I don't buy the narrative that Miller somehow forgot what got him to that record vs lower seeds. These last 3 years have deeper roots than Miller just simply not being a good tourney coach, as he was a great tourney coach for years.

As for the idea Arizona recruits itself, etc, I can't help but remember the old "pride goeth before the fall" idea. I think we are a very good job, but that is not a guarantee of hiring a very good coach.

[cpt]

I see no one is disputing the three assertions about SM’s coaching: 1) can’t design an offense to beat a zone 2) won’t teach or allow his team to play a zone when that strategy is warranted and 3) runs a boring offense

[Beachcat97]

I actually completely agree with cpt on the zone points. It's mind-blowing that Miller's teams continue to struggle versus zones year after year. I get the "do what we do" defense strategy, but here, too, would be an area for Miller to grow as a coach. There are indeed times when a zone can be highly effective.

[cpt]

I see no one is disputing the three assertions about SM’s coaching: 1) can’t design an offense to beat a zone 2) won’t teach or allow his team to play a zone when that strategy is warranted and 3) runs a boring offense

Top 10 coaches don’t have those problems Year-in, year-out regardless of talent.

[CalStateTempe]

I myself have been waiting for “Miller to grow” as a coach for 5 season.

It ain’t happening folks.

Do what we do.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I see no one is disputing the three assertions about SM’s coaching: 1) can’t design an offense to beat a zone 2) won’t teach or allow his team to play a zone when that strategy is warranted and 3) runs a boring offense

I would dispute all 3 to at least some extent. That said, there are about 5 billion posts in this thread discussing exactly those points.

Short of regurgitating the things I've already said a ton, is there something new or different to this discussion?

Also, anyone who wants more zone and a faster offensive tempo has to realize those things are diametrically opposed to each other, right?

[ChooChooCat]

Wtf is the point of bitching about Miller's coaching? Barring some unforeseen shadiness he's our coach next year. His team's performance along with his 2020 recruiting will dictate if he'll be the coach the following year. Deal with it.

[azgreg]

Just checking in.....ummm.......Miller ain't fired yet right?

[cpt]

Wtf is the point of bitching about Miller's coaching? Barring some unforeseen shadiness he's our coach next year. His team's performance along with his 2020 recruiting will dictate if he'll be the coach the following year. Deal with it.

Here's my point: I don't get the fear of him leaving/being fired that a lot of people have here. I passed that last year. I'm personally ready to see a new brand of basketball. I also don't understand how some fans think if Miller is out UA basketball sucks. I totally agree with Newport. We are bigger than Sean Miller. We always have been.

[Spaceman Spiff]

Wtf is the point of bitching about Miller's coaching? Barring some unforeseen shadiness he's our coach next year. His team's performance along with his 2020 recruiting will dictate if he'll be the coach the following year. Deal with it.

Here's my point: I don't get the fear of him leaving/being fired that a lot of people have here. I passed that last year. I'm personally ready to see a new brand of basketball. I also don't understand how some fans think if Miller is out UA basketball sucks. I totally agree with Newport. We are bigger than Sean Miller. We always have been.

The most important brand of basketball is winning, at least for me.

We may not suck without Miller. Whether a new coach can match or exceed Miller's success is what I'm doubtful about. There's a huge gap between our current situation and suck.

[EVCat]

I don't buy the narrative that Miller somehow forgot what got him to that record vs lower seeds. These last 3 years have deeper roots than Miller just simply not being a good tourney coach, as he was a great tourney coach for years.

As for the idea Arizona recruits itself, etc, I can't help but remember the old "pride goeth before the fall" idea. I think we are a very good job, but that is not a guarantee of hiring a very good coach.

While I can entertain the thought that Miller is better off coaching that top 100 player than the elite class player, which may be the difference between his career up to 2016 vs since, I would argue it is really more about what elite player you are getting, and how you reach them. Aaron Gordon was nothing but a fkn pleasure to have in an Arizona uniform, and he got better. Deandre as well...to suggest he didn't get better from high school to draft is simply false. Alkins was a mixed bag, and Trier sometimes seemed willfully against playing defense, but gave so much at the other end you had to accept one for the other. Stanley Johnson was also a mixed bag, but he was dealing with holy hell personally. Brandon Randolph is just dense. Josiah Turner had red flags from top to bottom but Miller was also having to rebuild the program and couldn't take the time to split hairs in getting the #1 PG recruit in the country. There were other questionable characters during that time, but not elite players...Miller was having to take the best he could in that early period.

And Miller seemed to do fine with Solomon Hill and other elite players early on, and boy, did they improve. Not sure why Miller gets blamed for the failures, but Derrick Williams coming to campus a 3 star and rocketing up to the #2 pick in the draft, only to completely bust once he left Arizona for the NBA is not considered evidence of development under Miller. And, let's be real...a lot of the "development" of players rests with the assistant coaches. And Miller has had a problem recently with retaining assistants, either in positive attrition (Pasternack, Romar, etc) or negative (Book, Phelps).

As for Arizona recruiting...Lute rarely had elite classes. But he and his staff developed good to great talent...at a time when you kept even the most elite player for 3 years. It is a lot easier to "develop talent" when talent spends more than 9 months on campus.

[EVCat]

The most important brand of basketball is winning, at least for me.

UCLA won with Ben Howland, who was certainly not LA flashy, and if they have a chance to get Tony Bennett, they would be fools not to jump at it. Can you imagine them hiring someone like Enfield over Bennett because of "style of play"?

I mean...I can. But I would also, as a fan of a rival, be overjoyed at the lack of common sense.

[Spaceman Spiff]

I don't buy the narrative that Miller somehow forgot what got him to that record vs lower seeds. These last 3 years have deeper roots than Miller just simply not being a good tourney coach, as he was a great tourney coach for years.

As for the idea Arizona recruits itself, etc, I can't help but remember the old "pride goeth before the fall" idea. I think we are a very good job, but that is not a guarantee of hiring a very good coach.

While I can entertain the thought that Miller is better off coaching that top 100 player than the elite class player, which may be the difference between his career up to 2016 vs since, I would argue it is really more about what elite player you are getting, and how you reach them. Aaron Gordon was nothing but a fkn pleasure to have in an Arizona uniform, and he got better. Deandre as well...to suggest he didn't get better from high school to draft is simply false. Alkins was a mixed bag, and Trier sometimes seemed willfully against playing defense, but gave so much at the other end you had to accept one for the other. Stanley Johnson was also a mixed bag, but he was dealing with holy hell personally. Brandon Randolph is just dense. Josiah Turner had red flags from top to bottom but Miller was also having to rebuild the program and couldn't take the time to split hairs in getting the #1 PG recruit in the country. There were other questionable characters during that time, but not elite players...Miller was having to take the best he could in that early period.

And Miller seemed to do fine with Solomon Hill and other elite players early on, and boy, did they improve. Not sure why Miller gets blamed for the failures, but Derrick Williams coming to campus a 3 star and rocketing up to the #2 pick in the draft, only to completely bust once he left Arizona for the NBA is not considered evidence of development under Miller. And, let's be real...a lot of the "development" of players rests with the assistant coaches. And Miller has had a problem recently with retaining assistants, either in positive attrition (Pasternack, Romar, etc) or negative (Book, Phelps).

As for Arizona recruiting...Lute rarely had elite classes. But he and his staff developed good to great talent...at a time when you kept even the most elite player for 3 years. It is a lot easier to "develop talent" when talent spends more than 9 months on campus.

I could not agree with your last sentence more. I don't ever think we'll see another coach win with Lute's model because that doesn't happen today.

Lute got his fair share of blue chippers, but the one and done market wasn't like today. If I remember right, Rick Anderson redshirted after his sophomore year. He was a top 100 recruit too. Good luck getting that to happen today.

[Longhorned]

Lute was also great evaluator of talent. He simply couldn't get the players who UCLA wanted, but he knew which of the underrated recruits to take onboard.

[azcat49]

In a scenario where we might be looking st reduced scholarships in the near future it would be nice to have a coach who can recruit the best guys for the ships we go have. Introducing Sean Miller