Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

[CappinHard]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

What did Justin Sell do? Nothing close to this and that's why the Jack fan base should be upset in the process he employed.

How do you know this?

[SoDakJack]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

I don't understand the anger towards Miller not getting the position. It's like Sell turned down hiring the next John Wooden. For all we know Miller wanted to move the program in an entirely different direction/change staff/revoke scholarships.

I guess what I'm saying is that this decision was made by people that had much more information than any one of us on this board.

How about we let the results on the floor decide how to view this hiring.

[goon]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

How about we let the results on the floor decide how to view this hiring.

What kind of crazy talk is this?

[Southeast]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

Just when shadowy doubts were starting to creep in, this thread comes along and reminds me why I'm really glad I'm not a DI athletic director.

[Jacked_Up]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

I was initially in the Miller camp. He was my first choice for the job (based on limited research gleaned mostly from this board). Coach Otz was my second or third choice, but I'm not disappointed with him getting the job. He seems highly qualified and has great experience to build upon. He has a lot more experience than Coach Nagy had when he came aboard. I also hope Coach Klink stays on staff. Despite our quibbling, the future of men's basketball looks bright!

[JACKGUYII]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

Did Klink get a phone interview too?

[Kemo]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

Heard thru the grapevine that ESPN has already ordered a 30 for 30 documentary on this hiring process. Working titles open for suggestion.

Play at with the big boys and you get big boy results. I'll let the results on the court over the next few years speak to the hire. Personally, nothing surprises me and I could care less how we got to this point assuming everything was legal.

Sell'n High

What if I told you that the color of big boy pants... were blue and yellow?

[jacksfan29]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

I'm confused. If I recall Oltzelberger was one of the top candidates from day 1 (on this board). One poster came on here, no history in posting and began trash him to pump up Miller. Now suddenly Sell needs to be strung up because we are hiring a guy who many of you listed as on of your top candidates from day 1.

Last time I checked the guy has some serious experience. Is considered a top recruiter and seems like a really good guy. How about everyone calm down and trust an AD who has done an incredible job managing our athletic department. This thread may need to be closed, some folks have really gone off the rails.

[GoJacks2010]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

I'm confused. If I recall Oltzelberger was one of the top candidates from day 1 (on this board). One poster came on here, no history in posting and began trash him to pump up Miller. Now suddenly Sell needs to be strung up because we are hiring a guy who many of you listed as on of your top candidates from day 1.

Last time I checked the guy has some serious experience. Is considered a top recruiter and seems like a really good guy. How about everyone calm down and trust an AD who has done an incredible job managing our athletic department. This thread may need to be closed, some folks have really gone off the rails.

This. Each combo of University/AD and whoever has their own parameters and fits. None of this doesn't mean that Ryan Miller wouldn't be good to great. It doesn't mean that a different perspective he wouldn't have been more towards the top. The Miller connections seem to intrigue many of us. Nothing wrong with that. It doesn't mean that Justin Sell made the wrong hire. Justin Sell has SDSU's interests at heart.

[filbert]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

I don't understand the anger towards Miller not getting the position. It's like Sell turned down hiring the next John Wooden. For all we know Miller wanted to move the program in an entirely different direction/change staff/revoke scholarships.

I guess what I'm saying is that this decision was made by people that had much more information than any one of us on this board.

How about we let the results on the floor decide how to view this hiring.

When friends and relatives of certain among the publicly discussed candidates decide to take to social media to advocate for their biases ("friends" and "relatives" either definite or inferred from frequency and vehemence of on-line utterances), some degree of dissatisfaction can be easily predictable - - - at some point in the process, anyway.

Also, for the same reason, some (perhaps minor, perhaps insignificant, but perhaps not) degree of reticence to hire their very loudly announced, favored choices can also easily be predicted, should one sit back for a moment and think about it.

Squeaky wheels do get the grease. But they also occasionally get replaced, too.

Here's how it works in the real world, people:

An AD basically says "I'm going to target X people," X being some small number, maybe as many as 3, from a pool of "likely candidates" he/she has--drawn from his/her various contacts, previous jobs, Ouiji boards, seances, whatever. The AD then tries really really hard to get that person or those people into that position.

Meanwhile, the "normal" personnel process (if any) lumbers on at the usual glacial bureaucratic pace. This usually requires N number of candidates, N usually being larger than X.

If you're somebody who's applying for the job, and are not a member of set X, you're very, very unlikely to get the job, barring some highly unusual set of circumstances.

That's how it works in the real world.

It just has to happen a lot faster with a coaching position (for purposes of recruiting, mainly), and it happens pretty much completely exposed to the public eye, despite pretty desperate efforts on the part of the AD and institution to keep some marginal degree of secrecy/anonymity in the process. This is the main difference between hiring for a coaching position and hiring for pretty much any other executive job anywhere else. The boss has a list of people he/she wants. He goes down that list until somebody says "yes." The bureaucracy rubber-stamps the hire, and ensures that all the proper ritual genuflecting in the direction of the various hiring guidelines, regulations, and laws is performed.

Now go out and have a beer or other favored beverage of choice, y'all.

[SturgisJeff]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

Geez because Ryun Miller didnt get the job are we gonna have to worry about Macy leaving in anger.

[jack power]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

When friends and relatives of certain among the publicly discussed candidates decide to take to social media to advocate for their biases ("friends" and "relatives" either definite or inferred from frequency and vehemence of on-line utterances), some degree of dissatisfaction can be easily predictable - - - at some point in the process, anyway.

Also, for the same reason, some (perhaps minor, perhaps insignificant, but perhaps not) degree of reticence to hire their very loudly announced, favored choices can also easily be predicted, should one sit back for a moment and think about it.

Squeaky wheels do get the grease. But they also occasionally get replaced, too.

Here's how it works in the real world, people:

An AD basically says "I'm going to target X people," X being some small number, maybe as many as 3, from a pool of "likely candidates" he/she has--drawn from his/her various contacts, previous jobs, Ouiji boards, seances, whatever. The AD then tries really really hard to get that person or those people into that position.

Meanwhile, the "normal" personnel process (if any) lumbers on at the usual glacial bureaucratic pace. This usually requires N number of candidates, N usually being larger than X.

If you're somebody who's applying for the job, and are not a member of set X, you're very, very unlikely to get the job, barring some highly unusual set of circumstances.

That's how it works in the real world.

It just has to happen a lot faster with a coaching position (for purposes of recruiting, mainly), and it happens pretty much completely exposed to the public eye, despite pretty desperate efforts on the part of the AD and institution to keep some marginal degree of secrecy/anonymity in the process. This is the main difference between hiring for a coaching position and hiring for pretty much any other executive job anywhere else. The boss has a list of people he/she wants. He goes down that list until somebody says "yes." The bureaucracy rubber-stamps the hire, and ensures that all the proper ritual genuflecting in the direction of the various hiring guidelines, regulations, and laws is performed.

Now go out and have a beer or other favored beverage of choice, y'all.

Bingo. I need to add or replace upper level people from time to time and that's how the process goes. At no time am I obligated to give anyone a face to face interview. Neither is Justin Sell.

[Rabbit74]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

I have hired or chaired selection committees for a number oppositions in higher education at approximately this level but not in athletics as well as having been on the other end of the process.. Although coaching positions get some special treatment with respect to the process in terms of time line and advertising processes due to the urgency of such hires, they still have to meet the same principles as other hires with respect to fairness and confidentiality and other aspects. This usually does include making contacts with people you respect who may know of strong contacts or potential candidates themselves as a part of the process to develop a pool of candidates.. I personally had no favorites in this hiring as am not in a position to evaluate the apparent qualifications of the candidates. Having said this i will make some observations based on what has been said and inferred recognizing that much of that is far more speculation than known to be fact. First, it is very common to conduct an initial round of telephone interviews once the list of candidates has been narrowed to 5-10 candidates. Following those telephone interviews, the list is further narrowed to typically 2-3 candidates. Although references may be called earlier, they typically are not called until after the telephone interviews. And the only references called are those for candidates that are still truly under consideration. To call other references raises false hopes and wastes time. From what is know, it would seem that this is basically what was done. In these processes, one of the biggest of all possible red flags is when a candidate or family member of a candidate or even a reference tries to interject themselves into a process inappropriately. A "campaign" for a candidate is usually more harmful to an application then helpful. I recognize that the visibility of a position like this brings in a lot of unique issues, but even so, there is a fine line between what is appropriate and helpful and what is over the line and raises the question of trying to use ones influence inappropriately. Just my two cents worth. From what has been reported, it would appear that the process followed the expected/required procedures.

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

I have hired or chaired selection committees for a number oppositions in higher education at approximately this level but not in athletics as well as having been on the other end of the process.. Although coaching positions get some special treatment with respect to the process in terms of time line and advertising processes due to the urgency of such hires, they still have to meet the same principles as other hires with respect to fairness and confidentiality and other aspects. This usually does include making contacts with people you respect who may know of strong contacts or potential candidates themselves as a part of the process to develop a pool of candidates.. I personally had no favorites in this hiring as am not in a position to evaluate the apparent qualifications of the candidates. Having said this i will make some observations based on what has been said and inferred recognizing that much of that is far more speculation than known to be fact. First, it is very common to conduct an initial round of telephone interviews once the list of candidates has been narrowed to 5-10 candidates. Following those telephone interviews, the list is further narrowed to typically 2-3 candidates. Although references may be called earlier, they typically are not called until after the telephone interviews. And the only references called are those for candidates that are still truly under consideration. To call other references raises false hopes and wastes time. From what is know, it would seem that this is basically what was done. In these processes, one of the biggest of all possible red flags is when a candidate or family member of a candidate or even a reference tries to interject themselves into a process inappropriately. A "campaign" for a candidate is usually more harmful to an application then helpful. I recognize that the visibility of a position like this brings in a lot of unique issues, but even so, there is a fine line between what is appropriate and helpful and what is over the line and raises the question of trying to use ones influence inappropriately. Just my two cents worth. From what has been reported, it would appear that the process followed the expected/required procedures.

Thank you for this. There likely isnt one person thats been posting in this thread that is privy to enough info to make a sound decision on this hire.

[da_coach]

Re: Replacing Nagy: Who Ya Got?

OK, I've been reading this thread for days, and here is my somewhat limited take.

I had never heard of TJ Otzelberger until he was mentioned as a possible candidate.

I read his Bio, it looked pretty good.

I had heard of Ryan Miller, I read his Bio, it also looked pretty good.

I had never heard of Devries, I read his Bio, it looked pretty good.

I have no idea what the process was, if it was fair, who got asked what questions or what significance the phone interviews played.

I do know that I just went to the Iowa State board, and there is a 14 page thread there discussing the "South Dakota State Job" and TJ possibly landing it.

Which makes me think a couple things. 14 pages for an assistant coach leaving? That's something.
-Now there is the requisite talk of the "bigger schools" of whether SDSU is a good move for him, is SDSU a midmajor or low major...why would TJ leave for less money, etc, etc, etc...

But it is evident that pretty much everyone there wanted to keep him. Gives him credit as their best recruiter (by far). And some actually think staying as an Assistant coach at ISU is better than being a HC at SDSU.

He's young. (38) He has put in the time as an assistant at two P5 conference schools, and is by all counts, an excellent recruiter.

I know that there were alot of people excited about Ryan Miller. I understand it. I even fell into it a little bit, myself. He is a very promising young coach with a great resume. (I even allowed myself to daydream of a retired Mike Miller on the bench, as an assistant...what could that have been?)

But, just because "your guy" didn't get the job, it doesn't mean that the Jacks didn't just hire a very good coach. He certainly seems to check all the boxes you would be looking for in a first time head coach.

In the end, this will be decided by wins and losses. I wish him well. (and I hope, like I hope with all our coaches... that he avoids message boards).