Hot Seat- Akron Canisius Cornell Evansville FIU Georgia Georgia State Georgia Southern Grand Canyon Houston Indiana State Iowa State- open Kentucky Louisiana Monroe - open Marshall Michigan State Nevada Oklahoma- open Pacific (CA) Purdue Fort Wayne Robert Morris St. Bonaventure Saint Peter's Temple- open Tulsa Valparaiso Southern Utah- open
Creighton has been down for years. They were going downhill under the previous coach and they made the decision to make a change. Issue has been they made the wrong hire. If they learn their lesson they can be a lot more successful than they have been under the last two coaches.
5 losing seasons in 8 years, including the last 3. 2 NCAA tournaments in 8 years. For some strange reason they have never been good it seems. Rumors are they are going to go hard after the SEC coach right next door. Potter was good at previous stops so ISU would be good to pick up someone of his caliber.
I have heard for a few years now that Michigan State is going with Asst. Farnum when head coach decides to step down. With a season like this year, the change may be sooner than later..
Interim HC's to start the season LSU* Western Michigan* Georgia Southern* Retirement Washington Open Louisiana Monroe* Iowa State* Oklahoma Southern Utah Temple* And here I thought it would be a quiet year, we aren't even done with conference play for some schools.
Erickson was taking the program backwards the last few years but in all fairness the adjustment to the Big East was going to take a little time anyway. He landed the Northern Iowa job and within 3 years took them to the bottom of the Missouri Valley so I think he probably wasn’t the guy to lead Creighton in the Big East long term. Does anyone know when the Creighton coach has his contract up? If he has a couple more years that seat may not be hot.
I'm dubious about the posts on Creighton. Their current RPI rank is their second best since 2010. Their Massey rank, which I think likely is better, is their best since 2010.
It's been about the same, alternating between 7th and 8th. I'm patient -- I figure that if their rank keeps getting better, especially their Massey rank, then eventually the results will show up in conference results. (I figure they'll end up about 120 in the RPI ranks this year.) Or, the ranks will stop getting better and that begins to look like the best the coach can do. It doesn't always work out that way (I've apparently been wrong on Drexel; but then maybe I was right on Colorado State) but it's probably a better measure of what's likely to happen than a lot of other measures. He's in the coaching period where it's becoming fully his program -- I figure years 5 to 8 are where you really get to see how far he can take the team, and he's in year 6. So, I'd say the AD should be looking at 2 more years since this year's ranking will be an improvement.
If 3% of college athletic directors know what their women's soccer team RPI or Massey Rank is I would shocked. They look at record and conference finish. That's what the decisions are based on.
I've gathered that overall record and conference finish are what a lot of them look at, as it's what a lot of posters on the Hot Seat threads seem to focus on and I assume a lot of the posters here are coaching staff folk, who may tend to do the same thing. On the other hand, I know for a fact that there are occasions where an AD will look at long-term rating trends as a coach evaluation tool, especially if the coach -- or someone else -- shows the AD the trend information. ADs certainly should look at trend information, which can suggest the AD should retain the coach or should "go in another direction." Looking at a team's long term trend as compared to the trends of other teams within the same conference and the trends of other non-conference opponents within the conference's "competitive pool" also can be useful.
However, they changed AD's last year so that promise may no longer be valid. I have no insight, but I doubt a new AD would be loyal to the assistant of an unsuccessful program.
I agree, and had her on the hot seat at one point, however someone informed me that Oregon will most likely ride out the contract. No doubt Creighton, at a minimum, is warm.
I think her contract runs out at the end of this season...not 100% on that though. Anybody reading this know??
There's not a ton of buyouts in NCAA soccer. It just doesn't make sense, for the most part. If a donor comes in and helps, that's probably the best bet. No sense in even bringing up "hot seat" on anyone that has time left on their contract.
Oregon's head coach is doing terrible. Bottom three of the conference for what, five years in a row. No NCAA tourney bids there in her six some years. Her contract was six or seven years, if not gone this year, should be next. she always says look our rpi is so good, yeah top 100 because everyone in the pac 12 is top 100 if you win just a few games on the year. she does the bare minimum to get by. I'd be surprised if the Ducks admin put up with such a consistently bottom dwelling program. They have money, go get a good head coach. She cheerleads good though.
Why all this talk about Oregon? You all do realize that their all-time record entering 2019 was 187-246-46 right? It's obvious they've NEVER cared about WoSo. They've never made the NCAA tournament. Why is now something new or different? Last .500 season -- 9-9-1 (2018) Last +.500 season -- 12-6-2 (2006) Consecutive +.500 seasons -- 2 (1980 & 1981) .500 or above seasons -- 8 That's it. Their first two years in NCAA were the only consecutive winning seasons in the program's history. They've only had 3 total winning seasons in conference (1980, 1981, 2006). Take out the first two years because they dropped the program from 1982-1995, there's one winning season since a continuous program from 1996 on. Everyone knows money isn't an issue for most DI schools. Of course it's not an issue at Oregon. That's not the concern. No one truly wants to buyout in WoSo because it doesn't matter...especially at places like Oregon, clearly.