The interesting thing about the current coaching change is that we are applying historical performance to future results. I'm not sure there is a prototypical profile for a coach in the new NIL era. We are seeing some traditionally great coaches really struggling to adapt to the new world. Rick Pitino embraced the new 3-pointer that changed the game and found great success. He didn't adapt to the shoe company-AAU era like Calipari did, and Cal owned Rick for the next decade. The Portal and NIL has changed the game once again and now Calipari is struggling and a new style will find success.
You are seeing some programs hire general managers to help their coaches manage the roster with resect to the Portal and NIL. It seems to me that while you need a coach with good X's and O's, I think what will be more important will be the ability to gel a squad together, motivate them, and keep them together. I think the coaches that can excite and team and motivate them by wanting to perform instead of forcing them to perform. Personality may end up ruling the day. Not just with players, but one that can excite the fanbase and motivate NIL donors.
For example, is Shertz a guy with an impressive NCAA tournament record? Of course not, but does he possess the personality that will generate success? I don't know. The AD that is able to figure out the special sauce of the new modern coaching model will look like a genius and the ones that overpay for a historically-proven guy that will struggle in the new basketball paradigm will look like a fool. We may look back and see that the Louisville job may be the proving ground for the new model of coach.
You are seeing some programs hire general managers to help their coaches manage the roster with resect to the Portal and NIL. It seems to me that while you need a coach with good X's and O's, I think what will be more important will be the ability to gel a squad together, motivate them, and keep them together. I think the coaches that can excite and team and motivate them by wanting to perform instead of forcing them to perform. Personality may end up ruling the day. Not just with players, but one that can excite the fanbase and motivate NIL donors.
For example, is Shertz a guy with an impressive NCAA tournament record? Of course not, but does he possess the personality that will generate success? I don't know. The AD that is able to figure out the special sauce of the new modern coaching model will look like a genius and the ones that overpay for a historically-proven guy that will struggle in the new basketball paradigm will look like a fool. We may look back and see that the Louisville job may be the proving ground for the new model of coach.
Last edited:
