Hubert Davis Catch-all

[Bigs23]

Despite our recent streak of mediocrity we are still one of the most desirable jobs in college bball. We are able to provide a coach with more resources than 95% of jobs out there. We may not land the next Roy or Dean but it's very very likely we'll land someone who will do a better job than Hubert.

You'd think that but it's a different world right now.

The most desired coaches may prefer a higher paying job with lower expectations in the SEC or Big 10.

Who can they hire that's a sure thing?

We'll see how the season ends up. If he gets them to the S16 it's going to be tough to fire him.

I do think Hubert is probably last link to the Dean Smith era. It will be sad to see that end with him being fired.

 

[CHAMTRAIN]

You'd think that but it's a different world right now.

The most desired coaches may prefer a higher paying job with lower expectations in the SEC or Big 10.

Who can they hire that's a sure thing?

We'll see how the season ends up. If he gets them to the S16 it's going to be tough to fire him.

I do think Hubert is probably last link to the Dean Smith era. It will be sad to see that end with him being fired.

"Hubert is 19-36 in Q1 games"

I think there are A LOT of coaches who would do better with brand and resources we have. I do agree with you, if we make the sweet 16 he will not be fired, especially considering the nice wins we do have this year (UK, KU, Duke, UVA).

 

[finesse]

I know coaches have a lot of ego and I know that UNC is a big name job. I still think that it's going to be harder to sell the program than people think if we fire a coach who is an alumnus and took over a declining program and took it to 5 20 win seasons. I've heard all the Pollyanna talk about how anyone would be glad to be here but I don't think it's going to be that easy. They might actually choose a place with more realistic expectations.

 

[stankeylegjones]

According to IC/insiders, this was a no excuses year for HD and his staff. The university put a lot of money into resources and support (spent 14+ million on this roster). Given that, we're a mid-pack team in the league, and performing around a top-25 team overall in the landscape. That is not good enough, considering everything that has been put into the program this year. For comparison, ON3 reported earlier that Duke's roster was around 10 million. There are still games/opportunities left for this staff to improve the program, but to date, this is not good enough.

 

[Enigma94]

20 win seasons is a meaningless metric. We could go 1-6 the rest of the way and hit 20 wins. Would that be a good season?

 

[Bigs23]

"Hubert is 19-36 in Q1 games"

I think there are A LOT of coaches who would do better with brand and resources we have. I do agree with you, if we make the sweet 16 he will not be fired, especially considering the nice wins we do have this year (UK, KU, Duke, UVA).

Who specifically do you think they could get?

 

[Bigs23]

20 win seasons is a meaningless metric. We could go 1-6 the rest of the way and hit 20 wins. Would that be a good season?

25 is the new 20.

 

[Heelsandeers]

This factoid is constantly getting spammed on IC, but its germane:

"Hubert is 19-36 in Q1 games."

This is simply not acceptable at UNC, we've given him a long enough run way to prove himself. Despite his genuine efforts, he's failed, it's time to move on.

We all know that horrible Q1 record from the poor seasons

Sad they win 4 of 5 toughest games this year and are still a meager 5-5 in Q1

 

[altmin]

I know coaches have a lot of ego and I know that UNC is a big name job. I still think that it's going to be harder to sell the program than people think if we fire a coach who is an alumnus and took over a declining program and took it to 5 20 win seasons. I've heard all the Pollyanna talk about how anyone would be glad to be here but I don't think it's going to be that easy. They might actually choose a place with more realistic expectations.

I fear a Kentucky coaching search situation.

 

[uncjhodges]

I know coaches have a lot of ego and I know that UNC is a big name job. I still think that it's going to be harder to sell the program than people think if we fire a coach who is an alumnus and took over a declining program and took it to 5 20 win seasons. I've heard all the Pollyanna talk about how anyone would be glad to be here but I don't think it's going to be that easy. They might actually choose a place with more realistic expectations.

I do not think giving Hubert 5 years with decidedly mediocre results for UNC will be a negative factor at all. Now, how Roy and family react may be an issue (and one of the biggest impediments to getting a top flight coach in here next). We have been more than patient with Hubert

 

[CHAMTRAIN]

Who specifically do you think they could get?

Brad Stevens or Jay Wright....\s

I don't know, I think the Nate Oats range is certainly gettable. You obviously try to pry a Tommy Lloyd or Dusty May type guy away and see what happens. Then, you look at young up and comers who have had success at smaller schools. It's not like they are coming in to replace a legend, they are coming in following 5 years of mostly mediocre basketball. It does suck that there isn't a clear heir apparent and that a good amount of the young promising coaches either have major character issues or wouldn't come here.

My thing is we know what Hubert is, we just can't keep rolling him out for fear of future failure. I think we're doing long term damage to the brand.

I was a Hubert guy initially and really wanted him to succeed, I take no pleasure in thinking he's not the guy.

 

[Icky Mettle]

20 win seasons is a meaningless metric. We could go 1-6 the rest of the way and hit 20 wins. Would that be a good season?

This is true. We won 20 games in 2010 and 2023. Those were not good seasons. In fact, they were bad. 2010 was really bad. We also won 20 games last year, and I wouldn’t call last season a good season even if wasn’t all bad. 20-win seasons aren’t what they were 40+ years ago. We play more games now. 20 wins won’t automatically get you into the NCAAT.

 

[Icky Mettle]

It’s funny that the only coach to ever turn down a formal job offer from UNC was Roy Williams.

 

[Enigma94]

Brad Stevens or Jay Wright....\s

I don't know, I think the Nate Oats range is certainly gettable. You obviously try to pry a Tommy Lloyd or Dusty May type guy away and see what happens. Then, you look at young up and comers who have had success at smaller schools. It's not like they are coming in to replace a legend, they are coming in following 5 years of mostly mediocre basketball. It does suck that there isn't a clear heir apparent and that a good amount of the young promising coaches either have major character issues or wouldn't come here.

My thing is we know what Hubert is, we just can't keep rolling him out for fear of future failure. I think we're doing long term damage to the brand.

I was a Hubert guy initially and really wanted him to succeed, I take no pleasure in thinking he's not the guy.

Maybe you don't mean Nate Oats specifically when you say Nate Oats "range", but just in case if we ever hire that POS I'm out. F that guy.

 

[superrific]

Just a couple of observations:

1. Everyone does worse against Q1 opponents, because you know, they are Q1 opponents. Not necessarily under .500 worse, but the most common properties of good teams is that they don't lose against bad teams. Their losses are against good teams. This is true in every sport.

2. It matters who those Q1 opponents are. Playing the #1 and #2 teams is not the same as the #30 and #31 teams. We get Dook 2x a year, so that will slightly skew our degree of difficulty in Q1 games. It's only 2 games and Duke isn't invincible so the skew from that alone is probably small. I'd like to know what our average Q1 game looks like -- is it, on average, #25? Note: it could be more or less -- I have no idea.

I'm not sure this makes any difference in a final evaluation but it's at least worth noting.

 

[CHAMTRAIN]

Just a couple of observations:

1. Everyone does worse against Q1 opponents, because you know, they are Q1 opponents. Not necessarily under .500 worse, but the most common properties of good teams is that they don't lose against bad teams. Their losses are against good teams. This is true in every sport.

2. It matters who those Q1 opponents are. Playing the #1 and #2 teams is not the same as the #30 and #31 teams. We get Dook 2x a year, so that will slightly skew our degree of difficulty in Q1 games. It's only 2 games and Duke isn't invincible so the skew from that alone is probably small. I'd like to know what our average Q1 game looks like -- is it, on average, #25? Note: it could be more or less -- I have no idea.

I'm not sure this makes any difference in a final evaluation but it's at least worth noting.

I think Hubert is close to .500 against Duke, bizarrely. His record against top 100 clubs is right at .500. I think when we're at the point where we're attempting to explain away mediocrity it's a sign that it's time to move on. The history of the program is not mired in mediocrity, we're all trying to excuse it because we want Hubert to work out. It's simply not working out.

Adding the definition of a quad 1 game, it's not that "elite": It is defined as a home game against a top-30 team, a neutral-site game against a top-50 team, or an away game against a top-75 team.

 

[superrific]

I think when we're at the point where we're attempting to explain away mediocrity it's a sign that it's time to move on.

I was just adding an observation. You're free to do what you want with it, including this. I still think it's foolish to maximize the pain from every loss by making it an evaluation of the coach or the program. There will be time for that. But that's just me.