The Miami job is a crappy one, not because the school doesn't invest(They do), but because you are dealing with one of the ****tiest fanbases in college sports, the local community is frontrunner as ****, and the local HS talent rarely gives you a look, even when things are going well.
1. The job is "crappy"? Some hyperbole there. When it comes to job security, there may be no better place for an HC than Miami. I am sure there are plenty of coaches in the nation who make 50% of the salary of Coach L (or less) that have a fraction of the budget of his and would die to replace him in the ACC. But hey, this is a "crappy" job.
2. Our fanbase does suck, no argument there.
3. Local Recruiting: Our coaching staff, at least under Coach L, short of the big names has hardly recruited the local kids. Constantly kids leave the state and go on elsewhere to do much bigger things. Perhaps if we recruited harder locally, signed more players, then it would payout bigger down the road.
4. You left out the real problem. Our AD, admin and BOTs suck. Awful. Garbage. No leadership. No accountability. Pure apathy. The blame, mostly, falls on the leadership. As for the school "investing", they invest apathy and zero accountability. The coach pickers have consistently failed. Don't forget, they didn't pick Coach L either.
There's a reason why Miami before L had little success in over 50 years of basketball, not including not even having a program for a decade
Correct. Our Admin and BOTs made some utterly atrocious coaching decisions. In fact, short of Coach L eating his pride and submitting his resume, beg for the job, that trend would likely continue after Haith left.
Perry Clark and Frank Haith were atrocious hires. If you make atrocious hires, you get pretty "crappy" results.
You have to find a coach that either has a tie to the area and wants to come(IE L), or someone that sees it as a stepping stone to something better.
Uh no.
1. Or we need to have the right leadership, which we don't have, and find the best candidate for now. There are plenty of qualified candidates available that are drooling for a $2MM/paycheck and to coach in the ACC. There will always be plenty of qualified candidates too. Also, $2MM is pretty cheap and we can afford more (e.g. Coach L makes more than $2.1MM). I am just making the point that there are qualified coaches that make a fraction of that.
2. Why does it matter if it is a "stepping stone"? Do you expect your coaches to stay for life? Do you need that? We lost Coach Hamilton to the NBA, isn't that a good thing when the professional league wants your coach? What is this obsession with having a coach stay into perpetuity or for "5" years? How is that span relevant? If you want to keep your coach, pay them. Make them stay. Over the last 25 years, we've yet to lose another good HC to another school. Why don't we focus on the real problems and the now? Like finding the next HC.
3. I want a coach that can win. I am not concerned that he has a "tie" to the area.
Problem is that with the stepping stone coach, you can't expect to hit for a high average when you are replacing coaches every 5 years, due to them leaving for better jobs.
Again, this non-problem is raised. The only problem is finding the right candidate NOW. Many things can change over 5 years. Perhaps you don't want said coach to coach for 5 years. Perhaps they suck. There will always be more qualified candidates ready to fill that position.