You are getting your butt handed to you, capped off with bringing the other person's handicap/gift into the debate. Not cool.
If the fan base rips Barnhart... you also have to..
- Thread starter runningbears
- Start date
While all true, the question is will all that translate in a deep Tournament run...?Give him credit.
I thought Pope was a desperate hire and he was just settling.
I was 100% wrong. POPE encompasses everything I want in a coach. Embracing the past, Embracing the fan base, excellent communicator, HUMBLE leadership, and an analytical look at how basketball is being played in today's game.
I think Barnhart got very lucky that Cal decided to walk and didn't get stuck with the crazy contract he delved out, BUT it appears he hit a Home Run with Pope.
Props to Barnhart. (Now please copy and paste for Football)
Dr RB
Drew/Hurley/Donovan were the first picks. He settled, and I’m now thrilled he did.
Nah I didn’t feel that way. He had a fair post. As far as the debate, he won. I didn’t even really engage on it. Anyone can see my history of Mitch posts. Some people even asked if I was Mitch at a point or two which is funny
There’s good reason to believe Drew definitely was. He basically had to go after Hurley. If he didn’t at least *try, we’d have had Mitch on a stake
Pope looks like a good hire, so far. Let's give him a few years before we crown him the next Rupp. Not a knock, just saying.
Barnhart has had some good hires and some disasters. Rich Brooks was a good choice, Joker was awful. Making him a coach in waiting was just dumb. Stoops was good at the time. BCG was not. Cal was, but Mitch's hand was forced. imo Drew would have been a disaster here. Pope was a second choice. Elsy, horrible. Brooks looks good so far. It seems to me he is running about 50/50 at best on these types of decisions.
He seems to really hate change. Thus his contract handling is abysmal. It doesn't take a genius to know that you don't guarantee lifetime contracts unless a contractee is within a few years of retirement, and maybe not even then. Making sure the contractee is paid on condition of production is also standard. That is just first year business management stuff.
Otherwise the athletics program is making good money. He has bolstered up the other sports. Gymnastics, Baseball, Volleyball, Tennis etc. are all doing very well. They aren't money makers but I enjoy watching them sometimes. He has also kept the university out of major scandals, so that is a good thing.
Barnhart has had some good hires and some disasters. Rich Brooks was a good choice, Joker was awful. Making him a coach in waiting was just dumb. Stoops was good at the time. BCG was not. Cal was, but Mitch's hand was forced. imo Drew would have been a disaster here. Pope was a second choice. Elsy, horrible. Brooks looks good so far. It seems to me he is running about 50/50 at best on these types of decisions.
He seems to really hate change. Thus his contract handling is abysmal. It doesn't take a genius to know that you don't guarantee lifetime contracts unless a contractee is within a few years of retirement, and maybe not even then. Making sure the contractee is paid on condition of production is also standard. That is just first year business management stuff.
Otherwise the athletics program is making good money. He has bolstered up the other sports. Gymnastics, Baseball, Volleyball, Tennis etc. are all doing very well. They aren't money makers but I enjoy watching them sometimes. He has also kept the university out of major scandals, so that is a good thing.
Barnhart pulled off two of the best hires in college sports, right after saving the SEC’s post season face in football with that Jedi wave he pulled on the committee as Consigliere and friend of the most powerful man in sports Sanky.
Then got Cal to fold and saved the program 30 mil plus whatever Cal’s golden parachute retirement was.
Ya boy may come off as a meek, but he John Wicked his way through some shit last year.
Then got Cal to fold and saved the program 30 mil plus whatever Cal’s golden parachute retirement was.
Ya boy may come off as a meek, but he John Wicked his way through some shit last year.
The reason many of us on the Lair are upset with Barnhart is Joker and Stoops contract. We were upset with you because you were speaking in absolutes regarding football's future success or lack thereof and simply "be grateful for what we have". It wasn't that long ago that folks said "we'd never beat UT or Florida", but both happened multiple times. Most FB teams in the SEC will struggle to be contenders for sustained success.
I'm just saying never say "never". NIL and the portal is uncharted territory.
The Lair is a great board with some of the most loyal fans you've ever met. We have a few oddballs, but the diehards can bring it.
By the way, I give you respect for owning up to your departure whatever and taking it in stride. 👊🏻
Can you agree that being a pro-Stoops guy in the Lair is tantamount to wearing a “Kick Me” sign?
Give him credit.
I thought Pope was a desperate hire and he was just settling.
I was 100% wrong. POPE encompasses everything I want in a coach. Embracing the past, Embracing the fan base, excellent communicator, HUMBLE leadership, and an analytical look at how basketball is being played in today's game.
I think Barnhart got very lucky that Cal decided to walk and didn't get stuck with the crazy contract he delved out, BUT it appears he hit a Home Run with Pope.
Props to Barnhart. (Now please copy and paste for Football
Dr RB
Mitch absolutely got bailed out with someone being dumb enough to bail him out of that god awful contract.
I also think Mitch took an unnecessary risk hiring pope. Pearl was an easy hire that would've killed it. Of course i like pope exponentially better, but it required him being able to hire some amazing assistants. Fortunately, he did just that.
So far, so good. I know he makes me actually excited to watch uk basketball again. My concern will be when we have to start replacing some staff, which could be as soon as next year. With cal, we saw exactly how bad it can get after losing a key assistant.
That's where it gets weird. I'm very grateful for his vision he had. I just don't understand why he has so much exodus of assistants. We all miss Schlarman, so that wasn't on Stoops. I personally like Stoops and hope he can turn it around. He's SHOWN we can win and win big, but I wonder if he's tying the hands of his coaches too much.
We will agree there. I know this gets off topic for this thread, but I’m also upset at the revolving door of offensive coordinators specifically. I felt Stoops places the proverbial hand in the cookie jar far too much and I’m disgusted at the four win season. I lost my mind when posters were saying things like they were hoping we lose to move on from Stoops. Such a thing blew my mind. I know I upset a lot of folks by pointing out what I perceive as a glass ceiling on football but I felt that’s important to acknowledge when we think about how to interact with concepts like “what does success mean for a coach at Kentucky?” Meanwhile, some people literally hate the coach so much they want to lose. That kills me to my soul. I see no problem with Mitch hiring Stoops or even the contract he gave him but I think my debating days are done on it coz I am very alone in those views
I would argue Pope was an illogical hire.
- He had zero tourney wins.
- He had only one year in a major conference.
- UofL and Indiana had just made the mistake of hiring former players who didn't measure up, so how stupid could UK be to not learn from their mistake?
- He hadn't proved he can recruit.
- There are many coaches with more success who would come here
Mitch gambled and won.
- He had zero tourney wins.
- He had only one year in a major conference.
- UofL and Indiana had just made the mistake of hiring former players who didn't measure up, so how stupid could UK be to not learn from their mistake?
- He hadn't proved he can recruit.
- There are many coaches with more success who would come here
Mitch gambled and won.
Why does this fan base always hate the athletic director?
Under Mitch, we have...
- won a title in men's basketball and come close a couple more times
- won 10 games in a football season twice
- become a volleyball powerhouse
- gone to the World Series in baseball
- been competitive in other sports
Did others get Calipari here? Yes. Did we lose one of those 10-win seasons? Yes, just like most SEC schools trying to compete. But this fan base hated Larry Ivy. They hated CM Newton. They hated Cliff Hagan. What gives?
Under Mitch, we have...
- won a title in men's basketball and come close a couple more times
- won 10 games in a football season twice
- become a volleyball powerhouse
- gone to the World Series in baseball
- been competitive in other sports
Did others get Calipari here? Yes. Did we lose one of those 10-win seasons? Yes, just like most SEC schools trying to compete. But this fan base hated Larry Ivy. They hated CM Newton. They hated Cliff Hagan. What gives?
Pope does appear to be a good hire, BUT
let's be honest. If Calipari hadn't went looking for greener pastures of his own accord, Calipari would still be here. Still with a ludicrous buyout, just like we are still stuck with Stoops and a ludicrous buyout. And Barnhart would have a been happy as can be and not see any problem. So sorry, I'm not going to give him any credit when things worked out in spite of him.
let's be honest. If Calipari hadn't went looking for greener pastures of his own accord, Calipari would still be here. Still with a ludicrous buyout, just like we are still stuck with Stoops and a ludicrous buyout. And Barnhart would have a been happy as can be and not see any problem. So sorry, I'm not going to give him any credit when things worked out in spite of him.
Last edited:
I personally don’t think Barnhart wanted Hurley. I think there were important boosters who wanted Hurley so MB had no choice but pursue it. But he had just gotten rid of one quirky coach who he basically couldn’t work with. I don’t think he wanted another one. Hurley obviously can coach but personality wise he’s a strange bird.
Honest question for those thinking about hires/Mitch performance: When considering the successes, so we introduce as much context as possible to diminish the hire? When considering the failures, do we abandon as much context as possible to highlight the error?
I think no NCAA Tournament wins is a fair point, but it isn’t like he has no tournament wins at all.
His one year in a major conference was excellent. Top 4 in the best conference in the country. Not exactly coaching a national power.
I don’t think the UL or IU hires are relevant. An alum could be a good or bad coach. A good coach who happens to be an alum might have some advantages, as I think we’re seeing.
He had certainly proven that he could recruit. He hadn’t shown yet that he could recruit at UK’s level, but any good recruiter should become a great one working with UK’s brand and resources.
I’d love to see the list of coaches both with more success and more perceived upside who would have come here.
I still have a huge problem with the fact that Mitch’s first choice was to basically hire his church buddy Drew. I’m so glad we avoided him.
I would have been less excited with Drew coming in than I would have been with Cal returning. At least with Cal we could have crashed and burned relatively quickly. With Drew we were signing up for a decade of boring mediocrity from a preacher disguised as a basketball coach.
I would have been less excited with Drew coming in than I would have been with Cal returning. At least with Cal we could have crashed and burned relatively quickly. With Drew we were signing up for a decade of boring mediocrity from a preacher disguised as a basketball coach.
I think Mitch’s intention on this hire is the most important piece of context here. His first intention was to hire his buddy from church in Drew. That starts him with negative points in my eyes. I had “boys club” type hires and that’s all that would have been.
Fact is none of us know exactly how Pope was chosen. Pope could have called Mitch for all we know.
This is like how in math class how you arrived at the answer is more important than getting it right. The way Mitch arrived here wasn’t good.
I’ve got no problem with that point of view, but tell me, do you excuse the Billy Gillispie hire? I bet not and that kind of is the very issue I have with how Mitch is handled. No context for the fails, all context for the successes until they mean nothing
Well, Eddie Sutton had been to a Final Four and was widely regarded as one of the top coaches in the game in 1985.
Gotta be honest I was a freshman in college for the Gillispie hire and don’t remember much about the process. All I remember is Cal wanted it and Mitch didn’t call him and Jay Wright and Donovan turned us down.
Not real sure how to take your post. The subject was about the AD hiring our coach and many have mixed feelings about the hire.
Agree, our team needs areas to work on, has areas they look really good at but that was not the question of this discussion.
What team does not have issues to work on?
All I am saying is forget about what happened and look ahead.
Oh I’m 100% with you on that and I also believe BCG was a “good hire” at the time. I use the same methodology on every hire, though, and most people don’t even try to do that. That’s not to say that either hire (Sutton or BCG) aged well, they were awful in retrospect but I don’t fault either hire given the circumstances at the time. I allow for context for successes and failures.
He’s made some damn good hires, his issues are extending coaches to deals they don’t deserve. Calipari the second time, Stoops ridiculous buyout and payment period, and Elzy for one hot streak.Give him credit.
I thought Pope was a desperate hire and he was just settling.
I was 100% wrong. POPE encompasses everything I want in a coach. Embracing the past, Embracing the fan base, excellent communicator, HUMBLE leadership, and an analytical look at how basketball is being played in today's game.
I think Barnhart got very lucky that Cal decided to walk and didn't get stuck with the crazy contract he delved out, BUT it appears he hit a Home Run with Pope.
Props to Barnhart. (Now please copy and paste for Football
Dr RB
I don’t think he was doing that. I think he was clarifying his position while taking into consideration something BBH had made public before. They had a reasonable debate and both were very courteous and respectful to each other.
Sutton was a great coach, we just got him at the worst point in his life with his disease.
Hurley was so successful at this point you had to go after him. Fit or not he is at the top of the game. You have to take a shot when you have a job as prestigious as this one. It’s an optics thing too, we have the resources to hire the best and will use them to get who we need to keep us where we wanna be.
I basically agree. But I do remember reading an article in the Dallas newspaper in 2009 where the writer said that if Mitch Barnhart had asked around there were plenty of people in College Station who could have told him that Clyde’s prickly personality was not going to be a good fit at a place like Kentucky. But based solely on basketball he looked like a great hire. I sure thought so at the time.
If you want to be a sad sack or have a demented sense of humor, fire up BBM 2007 lol. I watch it time to time to troll myself, knowing how pumped we all were for HOLY H%LL WTF IS THIS?
Similar threads
