My main beef with Archie has always been thatArchived Message
Posted by Sydney Carton on March 18, 2017, 13:51:58, in reply to "ahead of archie"
he comes at a double premium. One premium for being from a high mid major, and the other for being a Miller. So you end up overpaying.
My concerns are similar, but it'a also worth adding that Underwood did not rebuild SFA. They were 16-2 the prior year under Danny Kaspar.
I think he's fine, but a half a step below Bryce.
Previous Message
if the core principle of the search is 'find a guy that wins,' it's hard to quibble with 53-1 in conference play at this last stop.
what's not to like? a lot feels like nitpicking. he coached under martin/huggy, so you wonder if he needs a lax DIA to succeed at a P5 school. recruiting is hard to judge, only been at OSU for a year. has 2 recruits coming in, and the better one is a fringe-100 PG from florida. we have one of those, too.
honestly, the biggest knocks on him are 1) he's 53 (so he's not going to be around for 15 years likely, but losing him to retirement is a good problem), and 2) oklahoma state pulled a Mike Brey this year. best offense in the conference (in the country, actually), but the conference's worst defense. i cringe at the 'worst' stuff. his defenses were fine at SFA, and his team was really short at OSU so it's easy to see why they were abused. but still, the worst...i don't love seeing that.
still, i have to believe that guys like underwood and bryce and up can coach 3-star talent to a tournament bid. OSU is massively improved from last year. i might give bryce a slight edge, in large part to his youth and the Rev, but underwood is right there.
i don't know that the fanbase sees him as a better hire than archie, but he is IMO.