No not THAT kennedy

Waiting 6 years to read this. Bad bull.

Stansbury to Ole Miss?

It seems like texags is the only place where I see that teams (meaning A&M) can't get rid of a coach mid-season. Everyone else seems to think it's okay to do so and get a head start on hiring the next coach.

Quote:

---

Kennedy fired!

---

OP,

Padre_Island_Ag said:

---

Quote:

---

Kennedy fired!

---

OP,

---

OP, this...just this.

Staff - Thanks for the subject line edit!!

Kind of weird...

People talk about coaches we missed out on, but Ole Miss had the chance to get Mike White (who went to Ole Miss) when they opened their new basketball arena a couple of years ago...

Wonder who will be interested in that job. It's probably one of the worst jobs in the SEC.

bobinator said:

---

Wonder who will be interested in that job. It's probably one of the worst jobs in the SEC.

---

At least Ol Miss isn't sitting around talking about how bad they've always been and figuring this guy is just the best they can do.

Andy Kennedy is in his 12th season and only made the tournament twice...

Great.... 5 more years of basketball hell for us

Only UF, and Kentucky have won more games Then Andy Kennedy has during that time. The idea that Andy Kennedy is a bad coach is wrong. Ole Miss is easily the hardest SEC job.

Did anyone say he was a bad coach? I think he's average. Maybe being the most consistently mediocre team is an achievement in and of itself.

South Carolina is probably just as hard a job as Ole Miss though. I'd think those are pretty easily the worst two SEC jobs.

South Carolina was one of the worst jobs in the sec, they hired Frank Martin

Auburn was one of the worst jobs in the sec, they hired Bruce Pearl

Mississippi State was won of the worst jobs in the sec, they hired Ben Howland

Coached 12 seasons at Ole Miss.

Made the NCAA tournament twice in those 12 seasons.

Won 1 NCAA tournament game in those 12 seasons.

A bunch of NIT appearances (6 times).

I'm not sure what your point is. Two of those three were unemployed when the schools hired them.

Maybe Tom Crean is headed to Ole Miss?

Yet during a 12 year span only UF and Kentucky won more games. This doesn't strike mediocre. Not saying it was great. But the SEC wasn't getting teams in for years. So winning 20+ wasn't gonna totally get you in.

I was told this was coming a few weeks ago.

I hope he gets hired as an analyst on ESPN. He would be a great and hilarious addition.

Mikesyracuse1

South Carolina actually has a recruiting base unlike the Mississippi schools. Not saying Kennedy is a world beater. But he won a lot of games.

I bet he joines Huggins. Huggins needs new blood on his staff.

Double Diamond said:

---

Yet during a 12 year span only UF and Kentucky won more games. This doesn't strike mediocre.

---

Kennedy's teams won between 7 and 10 conference games every year he's been the coach except for the two years they went to the NCAA's.

That's amazingly mediocre.

bobinator said:

---

I'm not sure what your point is. Two of those three were unemployed when the schools hired them.

Maybe Tom Crean is headed to Ole Miss?

---

So you didn't understand my point, yet you followed it up with a statement that clearly proves you understood my point?

weird

If your point was "sometimes there are good coaches out there for the getting" then I guess I did understand it. But I was guessing at your point.

Yet let's ignore the fact Kennedy won 20+ 9/12 seasons. Twice winning 24 games and only getting the NIT. Look I'm not saying Kennedy was a world beater. But Ole Miss could do a lot worse.

Ag_EE_88 said:

---

It seems like texags is the only place where I see that teams (meaning A&M) can't get rid of a coach mid-season. Everyone else seems to think it's okay to do so and get a head start on hiring the next coach.

---

The head start advantage doesn't exist because in the grand majority of situations, the AD already knows he's canning the coach and starts chatting up agents long before the final game. I mean look at Sumlin. We waited until the end of the year, entered coach hiring season way behind (supposedly anyway), and landed the 3rd or 4th best coach in the NCAA (clearly behind Saban and Meyer, possibly behind Swinney, and that's it).

Point:

Several jobs in the SEC over the last 5 years have been seen as "one of the worst jobs", but there are several examples of these jobs being filled by good, accomplished coaches.

I don't look at overall wins because non-con schedules can be absurdly bad. Winning 20 games isn't an achievement if you spot yourself 13 wins at the start of the year.

I agree they could do a lot worse, I'm just saying they've been extremely mediocre under Andy Kennedy. Only twice good enough to make the NCAA's (once as a 12, once as an 11) but never posting less than 7 conference wins.

That's like the absolute definition of mediocre.

If they think they can do better than that though then good for them, always have to try and be better than you are, even if your history says otherwise.

Then why don't Ole Miss basketball coaches do this? Or why in the world don't more teams win. It's garbage to simply rule out wins. Only UK and UF have won more games over these 12 years. Yet you act like that's nothing.

_lefraud_ said:

---

Point:

Several jobs in the SEC over the last 5 years have been seen as "one of the worst jobs", but there are several examples of these jobs being filled by good, accomplished coaches.

---

Okay, I guess my point is that two of those guys were unemployed coaches that most schools didn't want. That's why I said that I'd be interested to see who wants this job or who they try to go after.

There are a few coaches out there that fit the "accomplished, but not currently seen as elite" mold if Ole Miss wants to go that way. Sampson and Crean maybe.

Or, do they try for an up and comer? That's where I think things would get interesting because I'm not sure many up and comers would take that job compared to some of the others.

I don't understand how this point is even arguable. They've been mediocre literally every single year under Andy Kennedy other than maybe 12-13 where they were slightly above mediocre.

But like I said, they've almost been impressively mediocre in the sense that they've never really had a bad season. They just have 12 okay seasons.

They are the definition of consistently mediocre. Now, like I said, maybe being consistently mediocre at Ole Miss is an accomplishment in and of itself, but it doesn't change the fact that they've been mediocre.

Double Diamond said:

---

Then why don't Ole Miss basketball coaches do this? Or why in the world don't more teams win. It's garbage to simply rule out wins. Only UK and UF have won more games over these 12 years. Yet you act like that's nothing.

---

Ole Miss is the ONLY school in the league to not go through a coaching change during this span...don't you think that plays a role in overall wins for said span?

No idea what a change means. All I know is Andy was winning a lot of games with 2/3 star talent and it a lot of cases no star talent. Juco kids etc. winning 20+ games ain't average. And if it's easy why don't more average coaches do it?

I'm asking, because I don't know, or can't think of one, but what up and comer can be picky? I don't disagree that Ole Miss is a tough job, I'm just not sure up and comers ever really have to make a decision on school A over school B.

Current SEC coaches:

UK - Calipari
UGa - Fox
Arky - Anderson
A&M - Kennedy
Usc - Martin
Tenn - Barnes
MissSt - Howland
Bama - Johnson
Auburn - Pearl
Florida - White
Vandy - Drew
Mizz - Martin
LSU - Wade

Wade, White and Drew I think are your only up and comers. White could be picky, but im not sure the other two could have been.

Edit: Fox was also up and comer, but again, I'm not sure one that could be picky.

Because most schools don't let you be average for a decade.

I agree this could backfire on Ole Miss, they could end up truly sucking, but you have to try right? When you've had the same coach for 12 seasons and the best you've ever done is barely making the field, don't you have to try and do better?

Double Diamond said:

---

No idea what a change means. All I know is Andy was winning a lot of games with 2/3 star talent and it a lot of cases no star talent. Juco kids etc. winning 20+ games ain't average. And if it's easy why don't more average coaches do it?

---

A coaching change will typically account for a couple of bad, to really bad years (in terms of wins) for most programs.