Should Wanless remove Coach Craighead's "Interim" tag?

[Kadeezy]

I've seen this being discussed on the board and wanted to create a poll...

 

[OldHornet]

She's done an amazing job with this team. I don't care if they're are seniors or if they are someone else's recruits, bottom line she is doing what others haven't been able to do - WIN!!

 

[SactoHornetAlum]

She has helped recruit most of this team as she was an assistant the previous two years. She more than gets the perm gig!!

 

[The Green Hornet]

I've watched them play a few games and I really enjoy her style of ball. They are fun to watch. Pressure D and after a rebound they push it up court immediately. She gives the players a lot of freedom on their shot selection. Whatever they're doing, it's working and she'd be a fine hire. All coaches have to start somewhere. Who's to say she won't turn out to be a great one someday? Lou Holtz' first head coaching gig wasn't at Notre Dame; he started out at William and Mary.

 

[SDHornet]

I don't follow women's hoops any, but if a coach has proved that the have the ability to win and recruit athletic players, I don't see a reason why they aren't made the HC...that is of course is Wanless and Craighead can agree on a reasonable salary. :roll:

 

[superhornet]

By "reasonable," SD, I hope you mean equivalent to Brian's. I absolutely HATE this inequivalency stuff.

 

[SactoHornetAlum]

So SH, were you at the game on Saturday when we whipped up on UOP?

 

[superhornet]

Uh, no. I was too busy doing homework. This past week was rough with preparing for tests and doing class discussion boards. This week I have two papers to write to prepare for NEXT week's discussion boards. I can't WAIT to get this semester over with. Graduation in May just CAN'T come soon enough!

That said, I wouldn't have wanted to see a blowout EITHER way. The coach UOP got from Chico is OK, but I still think UOP would be better off had they made a play to get the Goddess back. The guy who followed her literally ruined the program, and it's taking WAY too long for Roberts to get it back up to where the Goddess had it. The Sac program, on the other hand, has been down for so long that Craighead deserves a chance to do her thing before we blow her out. She hasn't been around long enough to say that she's had that chance yet.

 

[SactoHornetAlum]

Craighead has not been around long enough to earn that chance yet? Are you freaking serious? I have been to nearly every home game for the past three years...SHE HAS MORE THAN EARNED IT!!!

Wow, to think I have seen everything on this board...that statement takes the cake. :roll:

 

[wrkrb]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: If Katz had this record some on this board would be anointing him for saint hood. Heck, SH has to even acknowledge her beating his "goddess" (cracks me up every time I read it).

She has EARNED a long term contract!

 

[SactoHornetAlum]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: If Katz had this record some on this board would be anointing him for saint hood. Heck, SH has to even acknowledge her beating his "goddess" (cracks me up every time I read it).

She has EARNED a long term contract!

Without question...

 

[SDHornet]

By "reasonable," SD, I hope you mean equivalent to Brian's. I absolutely HATE this inequivalency stuff.

By reasonable I mean on par with other women D-I hoops programs that are in a similar position as Sac State…or at least somewhere in that pay range. Whatever they can work out to keep Craighead at Sac for 4 years or so, assuming Wanless is sold on the idea in the first place and assuming Craighead is the right person for the job. (Which according to all the posts on this board it sounds like she is.)

 

[SDHornet]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: If Katz had this record some on this board would be anointing him for saint hood.

If Katz had a record like this, he would still have 3 more years on his contract to keep Sac State climbing up the Big Sky standings...assuming the team steadily improved over those 3 years and was in contention for a BSC championship and NCAA Tourney birth, then yes.

 

[superhornet]

Craighead has not been around long enough to earn that chance yet? Are you freaking serious? I have been to nearly every home game for the past three years...SHE HAS MORE THAN EARNED IT!!!

Wow, to think I have seen everything on this board...that statement takes the cake. :roll:

What I meant, SHA, was that Craighead hasn't been around long enough for a cr@ppy record to justify blowing her out. The cr@ppy record, to some degree, still represents the dearth of talent from the previous couple of regimes, not Craighead's recruiting. Give her a couple of years to do her thing, THEN evaluate it from there. But, yes, she's done enough by now to get the interim tag removed, which, if Wanless is smart, would justify at least a small bump in pay.

 

[JackHornet]

The record is more a case of the situation than Craighead being a great coach. If Dan was here, the team would have the same record.

Craighead should not get a long term contract. We should open the job up and get a better coach. But this school will just remove the interim tag and we will suffer losing seasons, then get rid of Craighead when her contract is up.

 

[jmb]

The record is more a case of the situation than Craighead being a great coach. If Dan was here, the team would have the same record.

With this view, it doesn't matter what she does. Sac State is a school that gives coaches many reasons to use excuses. I can't believe we are in situation where a coach is showing a degree of success and you would actually want to make an excuse as to why she is doing well. The bottom line is that she has the team performing and winning games. Any other coach we look at will not have a track record of success at the DI level. I say extend her contract.

 

[SactoHornetAlum]

The record is more a case of the situation than Craighead being a great coach. If Dan was here, the team would have the same record.

Craighead should not get a long term contract. We should open the job up and get a better coach. But this school will just remove the interim tag and we will suffer losing seasons, then get rid of Craighead when her contract is up.

I disagree. Muscatell would not have implemented the full court run and gun game that Craighead has. It would have been more of the same half court defense and old school post play, which wasn't really working. The reason Ashley Garcia has had the best season of her career, she is able to run up and down and doesn't have time to think about setting up plays...before, when she would do that, she would inevitably turn the ball over almost without fail.

Seems to me Craighead is utilizing the talents of the players she has...I'd say that's a pretty astute coach...

 

[JackHornet]

The record is more a case of the situation than Craighead being a great coach. If Dan was here, the team would have the same record.

With this view, it doesn't matter what she does. Sac State is a school that gives coaches many reasons to use excuses. I can't believe we are in situation where a coach is showing a degree of success and you would actually want to make an excuse as to why she is doing well. The bottom line is that she has the team performing and winning games. Any other coach we look at will not have a track record of success at the DI level. I say extend her contract.

Your post shows, just how low our program has become. We consider success a coach winning 10 games?

Not making excuses for her "success" but she would have had to win 20 games to make me say she can take this team to another level.

The question should be do we have a coach who can win the Big Sky. Craighead isn't that coach.

 

[SactoHornetAlum]

Your post shows, just how low our program has become. We consider success a coach winning 10 games?

Not making excuses for her "success" but she would have had to win 20 games to make me say she can take this team to another level.

The question should be do we have a coach who can win the Big Sky. Craighead isn't that coach.

:roll:

You don't know that, you don't know that at all!! This is her first year as head coach and we are in double figures in wins for the first time in 15 years!! Im comparing the teams success this year to all that has happened in the past several years. As long as she keeps improving the program on the court (with wins) and in the classroom (with increased gpa and grad rates), she'll be the coach as long as she wants.

Since you think you know so much JH, why don't you explain to the Hornet faithful here why she won't be successful since you apparently think you have all the answers....inquiring minds want to know...

 

[jmb]

The record is more a case of the situation than Craighead being a great coach. If Dan was here, the team would have the same record.

With this view, it doesn't matter what she does. Sac State is a school that gives coaches many reasons to use excuses. I can't believe we are in situation where a coach is showing a degree of success and you would actually want to make an excuse as to why she is doing well. The bottom line is that she has the team performing and winning games. Any other coach we look at will not have a track record of success at the DI level. I say extend her contract.

Your post shows, just how low our program has become. We consider success a coach winning 10 games?

Not making excuses for her "success" but she would have had to win 20 games to make me say she can take this team to another level.

The question should be do we have a coach who can win the Big Sky. Craighead isn't that coach.

Read closely moron. I stated the coach is showing a degree of success. It is clear you have an axe to grind with this coach and it must kill you that she is well on her way to getting an extension.