Hate to be a cynic,but based on past situations at O.U., and other schools,
if a coach wants to leave,all a contract extension and raise does,is increase the amount of the buy out.

The old heads in town won't like it (muh van Exel), but he was the name that came up a lot for the UNC job.

Wes Miller is getting the gig.

I think it's a nice hire as well. Frankly, I think it's the best case scenario they could have asked for given the situation. They reportedly can't afford John's buyout, much less buying out another name coach's big buyout somewhere. He's built a program from nothing, and there are a dozen people within college basketball stating this was a great hire. And those dozen aren't all from the same line of work, and same place -- i.e. coaches, administrators, players, broadcasters have all weighed in with positives.

Also, for Cincy fans who like pressure defense (raises hand), that's something they were known for at UNCG according to what I've read.

Lastly, for the fans who are mentally stuck on hiring a former player: tough cookies. There aren't any former players that are ready to walk in and take the job - especially in a situation like this one where only four players remain committed or enrolled. And for the life of me, I cannot understand why on earth so many people are hell bent on requiring a former player as though that's always the best choice. Yes, it has worked out well here so far, but it doesn't everywhere, and the idea of hiring a "Cincinnati guy" solely for the sake of hiring one of your own is ludicrous, and a recipe for losing if you ask me.

Maybe Erik Martin was "ready". Maybe not. I lean towards maybe not. I don't view a guy who has been an assistant at the same place for fourteen years as a guy that's ready to move up the ladder and be a bigger basketball program's next head coach. To me, that guy should have taken the Boals-eque path and gone off the comfort zone of the bench next to the established head coach to become something bigger elsewhere first. From what little I understand, Erik Martin isn't even Huggy Bear's #1 assistant, and that says to me that he's probably not ready.

If he could justify it on its own merits, he would have. The fact that the argument he feels he can win is about whether or not UC has the "freedom to do this" says all you need to know.

You guys are missing the point. Who said that the non-profit institution bought out the coach? I suggested the buyout could have been financed by some wealthy donors and you agreed, but said it was hypocritical. Still don't see how that's hypocritical. I didn't say UC had the freedom to do this (even though they do). I said the wealthy donors had the freedom to spend their money any way they choose. Miller's buyout at Indiana was paid for by donors, not the school. Maybe the same thing happened at UC. So my justification is the donors can spend their money any way they want.

You still don't get it. Where is this 5 or 10 million coming from? There is no 5 or 10 million going to the school for general use. The donors are giving money to pay for the buyout. The school isn't getting this money and choosing to use it for the buyout. I really doubt that donors are saying, I'll give you $200,000 to help buy out the coach, but if you keep the coach I'll give it to the physics department. The donors want a new coach and will give the money specifically for the buyout.

I understand exactly what you are saying. You are telling the donors how they should spend their money. (And to say that the AD and President should refuse to accept their money is ridiculous.)

He's criticizing how donors spent their money; at no point has he, or anybody else, suggested they shouldn't be allowed to spend their money buying out a coach's contract. That's an idea you introduced.

The donors can spend the money how they like and Giacomo can criticize them for it. Because, frankly, it's a truly ridiculous thing to spend money on. If I ever have an extra 5 million dollars laying around and the best thing I can think to do with it is buy out the contract of an underperforming college basketball coach, I hope somebody in my life files to become the conservator of my assets, because that'll be a sure sign I've lost my sh*t.

I’m glad I could amuse you. I was thinking my opinions were more like the manimals in “Pluggers”.

It would be interesting to know which came first, the chicken or the egg. Did the AD and president want to fire the coach and solicited wealthy donors to buy them out, or was it the donors instigating it? If I’m the AD and the president, do I really want to draw attention to the outrageous salaries and further alienate faculty and alumni? There are some, like a few on here, that think it’s no big deal. I guess we’ll never know. But if I’m the AD or prez and some donors wanted to buy out a coach I would say no thanks. You’ll have to be ashamed to wear your Hoosier and Bearcat gear at the country club.

We’re getting dangerously close to critiquing IU athletics donor John Mellencamp, which is a felony in the state of Indiana.

Stevens was just on the pre-game show. He said he was never offered an IU contract and wouldn’t accept it if he was.
He just signed a new deal in August. .