OT: Amaker candidate for Boston College job

Submitted by PeteM on

I realize that there have been a few other posts about Tommy Amaker's success at Harvard, but just noticed this piece indicating that he is a leading candidate for the Boston College job:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2014/03/18/donahuesuccessorsforweb/FE…

Obviously, moving from the Ivy League to the ACC would be a step up in facilities, income and potential recruiting.  That said, my sense is that Tommy is in a good position at Harvard.  Whatever he lacked as a floor coach here, his recruiting has made up for there.  Anyway, while I know that worrying about an ex-coach's career choices isn't exactly the point of this blog (especially when we're all pretty pleased with the current coach), I have always thought Tommy was a good guy, did a decent, if not great, job here and thought that Harvard made a lot of sense for him.  Coaches always seem to move to the higher league, bigger name etc. but I think this move could be a mistake and am curious if anyone has thoughts on that.

Don

March 19th, 2014 at 10:07 PM ^

He can coach there for a long time without the "win now or else" pressure that a place like BC is going to have. A man's gotta know his limits.

funkywolve

March 20th, 2014 at 11:15 AM ^

I guess that depends on what your definition of mediocrity is. 

His first 3 years definitely weren't anything to write home about:

15-16 (6-12 in conference)

6-21 (3-15)

11-19 (3-13)

But then he went on a pretty decent run for a few years:

27-5 (13-3, first place in their division), won the Big East tourney, NCAA second round

20-12 (8-8), NCAA first round

19-12 (10-6, first place in their division)

24-10 (10-6) NCAA second round

25-5 (13-3,first place in Big East regular season) NCAA second round

28-8 (11-5, lost in the ACC tourney title game), NCAA sweet sixteen

21-12 (10-6) NCAA second round

Then he had 2 bad years out of 3 and was gone.

14-17 (4-12)

22-12 (9-7) NCAA first round

15-16 (6-10)

jcouz

March 19th, 2014 at 10:08 PM ^

job longevity and regular fan and media scrutiny. It all depends what Tommy is looking for in his career for himself and his family. He could definitely leave for more money. It is hard to judge the decision he makes without knowing his reasons for making it.

Hugh White

March 19th, 2014 at 10:13 PM ^

I think Harvard is a perfect fit for Tommy and vice versa.  The only position I could see luring Tommy away from Cambridge is a call from Duke some time way down the road.

FrankMurphy

March 20th, 2014 at 4:26 AM ^

I doubt he has any chance at the Duke job (unless he takes Harvard to the Final Four like, three years in a row or something). That ship has sailed. Duke would never hire a coach who was fired by another school. 

MGoGrendel

March 20th, 2014 at 6:24 AM ^

He's got many years more of coaching experience since he left Michigan. Maybe he's worked out some of the things that caused the lack of success at Michigan. Taking the BC job gives him that much more experience. With success comes the call from Duke. If he fails at BC, I'm sure he'll bounce around to other schools. There are worse coaches in D1 than Tommy.

readyourguard

March 19th, 2014 at 10:41 PM ^

If I was advising Coach Amaker, I'd suggest he stay at Harvard.  He can coach there for the remainder of his career, make a very comfortable living, continue to succeed, and retire a Crimson legend. 

TheNema

March 19th, 2014 at 10:49 PM ^

He is not a good coach and will not be successful in a major conference. His success at Harvard stems from his being a big fish in a small pond.

I understand some people liked Amaker as a person and want him to succeed, but it's hard to forget how completely disoriented his teams looked on the floor here.

BigMo89

March 19th, 2014 at 11:04 PM ^

I personally think he should leave. Yes he wasn't exactly a very good X's and O's coach when he was here, but maybe he's learned some things over the past handful of years.

Big time leagues (Big 10, ACC, etc.) aren't exactly forgiving, and maybe he fails again, but how much more high profile is Tommy gonna get? He's won the Ivy some years in a row now, which is the only way an Ivy is gonna get in the tourney. They won't be getting an at large anytime soon. I say give BC a shot. See if he can turn them around. I'd like to see him get a second chance at a high major, and succeed.

ldoublee

March 19th, 2014 at 11:14 PM ^

You think Amaker did a "decent, if not great, job". Seriously? If Amaker did a "great" job, then John Beilein is the 2nd comin of John F'n Wooden.

TheNema

March 19th, 2014 at 11:43 PM ^

Wooden, Auerbach and Phil Jackson combined. But smarter.

Seriously, anyone who thought Amaker was good here either didn't watch or has a short memory. Not making the tournament once in six years is very hard to do. I still can't identify what his basic offensive ideas were. Daniel Horton and Dion Harris probably can't either.

PeteM

March 20th, 2014 at 6:12 AM ^

I probably didn't phrase my point well -- meant "decent, not great." I think decent because he came into a complete mess with a losing team populated with guys like Ingerson. Bringing in Horton and winning the NIT a couple of years in was an accomplishment. Beating MSU at home 3x was an accomplishment. Helping to develop the maize rage was important. Not being able to get beyond that was where he failed.

umumum

March 20th, 2014 at 2:19 PM ^

Amaker did beat State 3 times, but we were crushed in 6 of the 7 losses.  And these weren't stellar State teams--save one over-achieving one.

Tommy's best recruiting year was essentially his first one.  And he brought in his share of Ingersolls---Smith, Morris, Jones, Queen--to name just a few.  Further, no one ever seemed to improve---making him the opposite of Beilein.

Tommy was a Stepford coach--devoid of emotion and his teams played accordingly. 

bronxblue

March 19th, 2014 at 11:17 PM ^

He has probably earned a second chance at a big-time program, but he really could become an institution in the Ivy League is he stuck around.  Going to BC, he'd probably suffer through some tough seasons like he did in A2.

steve sharik

March 19th, 2014 at 11:22 PM ^

...is that TA failed at Michigan b/c he didn't put in the time required of a major college coach.  You gotta get your face out there on ESPN (all channels and shows that serve college hoops), and your voice out there on talk radio, both national and regional.  TA apparently wasn't willing to do the dance that comes with the territory, and that's not necessary in the Ivy League.  If this is true, he should stay put.  And if one has no big ego, why leave Harvard? Why uproot your family?

Mr Miggle

March 20th, 2014 at 12:01 PM ^

His greatest failings were in player development and coaching strategy. Spending time on the things you mentioned might help a little in recruiting, possibly fundraising. That wouldn't have been enough to keep him from falling short of expectations here. It may well mean he's going to be more comfortable at Harvard, though.

joegeo

March 19th, 2014 at 11:27 PM ^

I think it's a perfectly fine decision. Everyone here is pretty down on his coaching abilities, but I think overly so. Some things to consider:

First, his level wasn't low before. We saw him do an okay job at Michigan... not a bad job. He didn't establish himself as an elite coach, but he was certainly quite capable.

Second, what are his limits? He had 4 years of head coaching experience when he came to Michigan; he has 17 years of coaching experience now. Some men might be born to coach and can win like crazy from day one. However, just because you don't start out your career with headlines doesn't mean you have a low limit.

I agree that Harvard is probably a low pressure job that has a lot of advantages, but he's taking a step up to a program that has a higher bar. Many of us would leave a low pressure job for a promotion to a higher pressure, more responsibility, and higher pay job. Let's not forget, BC is in the same town... he's not uprooting his entire life to do this. Pretty ideal situation really.

Ultimately, I think he's probably a much better coach now than he was while at Michigan and will do a great job with BC.

justingoblue

March 19th, 2014 at 11:23 PM ^

at Harvard Medical School. It's not like BC is unrealistic as a result (just assuming they wouldn't have to move or anything), but that would indicate some deeper ties at Harvard than your average Ivy coach has.

goblue16

March 20th, 2014 at 12:20 AM ^

He's established Harvard into a consistent winner and BC succeeding in the ACC is a dream. I would take a job like butler or Wichita instead. Program with a little more exposure in a decent conference and no unrealistic expectations

funkywolve

March 20th, 2014 at 1:12 AM ^

The ACC is going to be loaded when Louisville comes into the league next year.  You're looking at - Louisville, Syracuse, Duke, UNC and Pitt who are all annual participants in the ncaa tourney.  Virginia looks like they might be on their way to joining that group.  Then you've got some decent programs that are usually borderline ncaa tourney - FSU, Miami, NC State, GTech. 

You'd be going to try to revitalize a program that doesn't have a ton of basketball history, plays in one of the toughest conferences and doesn't have a great local/regional recruiting base.  Good luck.

goblue16

March 20th, 2014 at 12:23 AM ^

Does anyone have any games from the Amaker era?? I know it wasn't the best times for Michigan but there were some great memories an it was when i girst started watching bball. Only game I have is the NIT championship in 04

Cold War

March 20th, 2014 at 6:48 AM ^

Most coaches are driven and competitive, and are looking for challenges as opposed to staying where things are comfortable. Tommy doesn't seem to be wired like that. Which is sort of  the  reason he's not a better coach. He's a capable guy  with the passion of a turtle.

Raoul

March 20th, 2014 at 10:38 AM ^

It's funny that you mention "passion" because wasn't that one of the "p" words Amaker inevitably used in his infrequent media appearances (mainly the perfunctory postgame radio interview)? I just recall him frequently talking about the team's "passion" and "pride"—and there may have been a couple others (poise?)

Steve Sharik rightly points out above Amaker's unwillingness to make media appearances as one of his shortcomings as a Michigan coach. This contrasts sharply with Beilein, who not only appears on WTKA at least once a week, he also does the weekly Inside Michigan Basketball radio show and appears quite frequently on other media outlets as well.

Amaker never seemed comfortable at Michigan, and he gave the impression (perhaps an incorrect one) of someone not fully committed to the job.