Ot, do you see a change in recruiting philosophy when comparing Corny to Dan? What differences do you think we will see from Corny running the program now?
Listen I?m no expert by any means. I think Dan has been unfairly maligned on this board. I understand wanting better, but all in all I truly think Dan did a great job for a program that lacks a lot of historical success and tradition. I also think people don?t take into account that Dan?s job turned into one that was different than the one he was hired to do.
Dan?s greatest strength was the culture he built around Marshall basketball. It was this culture that allowed for some pretty great successes the first 6-7 years. However, the rule changes I think really threw that out of whack. Nil and transfer rules make culture irrelevant. How would you feel, if your greatest strength at work suddenly became irrelevant. Now culture and program doesn?t matter, it?s all year to year and team to team like a professional team.
To answer your question, I think (hope) corny can lean in to the portal, nil, etc a little more than we have in the past. I think corny being younger will help allow for an easier transition to this new age of college sports. If you look at the coaches having the most success in the portal, they tend to be on the younger side and not quite as ingrained in college sports (Utah states coach for example, golden at Florida, etc).
I think Corny will be strong in recruiting and know I?ll be rooting for his success and the herds success. He learned how to build a program under coach Dan and although that may be less important now, if he can mesh those lessons with his recruiting prowess, Marshall should have a very good one.