Let me first start by saying that I don't know what most of the Wake Forest fanbase thinks about Manning and his performance thus far, but I'm assuming (having purposely chosen not to go) that the morons at OGBoards are ripping this guy to shreds. I've been talking to one of my friends who is usually a pretty level-headed guy about Wake athletics, and even he seems to lay a lot of the blame at Manning's feet. On Twitter I've seen comments like "look at what Buzz Williams has done already at VT" and even recently saw Manning compared to He Who Shall Not Be Named. I just think that there's a pretty severe lack of perspective about how we've gotten to where we are today. So here's my take...
You can't begin to discuss Manning's performance without first taking into account the situation he inherited from HWSNBN. The previous coach was not only a disaster of a coach, I think more importantly, he was a disaster of a recruiter. His first couple of years he recruited players whose offer sheets didn't reflect talent that ACC programs were going after. It's nothing personal about the kids, but as it turned out, most of those players weren't at an ACC level. Late in his tenure he missed out on some big-time prospects, including letting big man Isaac Haas slip away to Purdue. The level of talent on the roster was atrociously bad, there's simply no other way to put it. When Manning took over the job, he was looking at one of the worst collections of talent not only in the ACC, but arguably in any P5 conference. When Bzzz got canned, the only players who I thought should have actually been on an ACC roster were Devin Thomas, CMM, Cavanaugh, and Moto (and he was a project). Unfortunately for Manning, and because he was simply so new there's no reason why he should take any of the blame, Cav and Moto decided to transfer before Manning ever coached a game (and as it turns out, Cav has developed into a pretty good player at Providence and one we could have used here). So basically, in my opinion, Manning had two ACC-level players on his roster when he started. Two. I think any sort of expectations for how quickly Manning could turn the program around needed to start right there. Why would anybody expect a guy to come into a situation with that sort of roster weakness and win right away? Or even win within two or three years?
To add to the unfortunate state of the roster, Manning started at Wake so late in the recruiting cycle that the majority of Top 150 players were already committed elsewhere, and those that weren't were already so deep into the recruiting process and had developed relationships with other staffs that he had no shot at them. Thus, he had to go out and try to find diamonds in the rough. I think Dinos, for as frustrating as he can be to watch at times, is an ACC-level talent and a good overall player for us. Wilbekin is a good role player. Hudson has a lot of talent, but hasn't put it all together. Considering how late a jump he got, that three-man class was probably as good as anybody could do. This added a little to the quality of the roster, but clearly the 2014-2015 squad didn't have enough to be a threat in the ACC.
During his first full season he was able to pull in one of the best classes in the country with three guys that are clearly ACC caliber, and by the time all three of them are done after the 2018-2019 season, I firmly believe that each could develop into an all-ACC type player. However, this season, they are true freshmen. To expect them to be all-world is unrealistic, but I think the fast start to the season gave people an unrealistic expectation for the rest of the season, especially in ACC play. This is arguably the deepest the ACC has been in several years, and Wake has played more ranked teams before the month of February than any other season in program history. I get it, we won some big, exciting non-con games and I was even starting to hope that we'd be a tourney contender. But the fact of the matter is, we are getting the majority of our minutes from a really good true freshman class and a sophomore class that was pieced together at the last minute. We have basically no juniors, and a couple of seniors (one of whom has played great, one of whom has struggled mightily). That's not a recipe for success, I don't care if John Wooden is coaching the team.
I say all of this because when you take a step back and look at this team, we still don't have the kind of roster we need to be a contender in the conference. One full recruiting cycle has been very successful for Manning, but that's not enough to fill a completely depleted roster. I think the guy deserves at least three years (and even that is not enough time in my opinion) before people start piling on him for poor coaching. I firmly believe that 90% of a team's success is based on roster talent. The coach can be the X factor that either pushes a team over the top or holds them back, but even a great coach can't make a team full of below-average players a contender. A lot of people will call attention to his use of timeouts, or his apparent distaste for zone defense and lay blame at his feet for the recent slide. But what about the fact that we are second worst in the conference in FT shooting and 3-point shooting? Is that really something that reflects Manning's shortcomings? I would argue that it's more a reflection of not having the right players. If we had more talent on the squad and we were even middle of the pack in those two statistical areas, I would argue that we probably would have won two or three of the ACC games we've lost.
Anyways, I just think we need to give the guy a chance and realize that this rebuild is probably a 4 year rebuild. Should that come as any surprise after what Bzzz did to the program? Trashing the guy publicly isn't going to do us any favors and will achieve the opposite of what our fanbase wants. My $.02
You can't begin to discuss Manning's performance without first taking into account the situation he inherited from HWSNBN. The previous coach was not only a disaster of a coach, I think more importantly, he was a disaster of a recruiter. His first couple of years he recruited players whose offer sheets didn't reflect talent that ACC programs were going after. It's nothing personal about the kids, but as it turned out, most of those players weren't at an ACC level. Late in his tenure he missed out on some big-time prospects, including letting big man Isaac Haas slip away to Purdue. The level of talent on the roster was atrociously bad, there's simply no other way to put it. When Manning took over the job, he was looking at one of the worst collections of talent not only in the ACC, but arguably in any P5 conference. When Bzzz got canned, the only players who I thought should have actually been on an ACC roster were Devin Thomas, CMM, Cavanaugh, and Moto (and he was a project). Unfortunately for Manning, and because he was simply so new there's no reason why he should take any of the blame, Cav and Moto decided to transfer before Manning ever coached a game (and as it turns out, Cav has developed into a pretty good player at Providence and one we could have used here). So basically, in my opinion, Manning had two ACC-level players on his roster when he started. Two. I think any sort of expectations for how quickly Manning could turn the program around needed to start right there. Why would anybody expect a guy to come into a situation with that sort of roster weakness and win right away? Or even win within two or three years?
To add to the unfortunate state of the roster, Manning started at Wake so late in the recruiting cycle that the majority of Top 150 players were already committed elsewhere, and those that weren't were already so deep into the recruiting process and had developed relationships with other staffs that he had no shot at them. Thus, he had to go out and try to find diamonds in the rough. I think Dinos, for as frustrating as he can be to watch at times, is an ACC-level talent and a good overall player for us. Wilbekin is a good role player. Hudson has a lot of talent, but hasn't put it all together. Considering how late a jump he got, that three-man class was probably as good as anybody could do. This added a little to the quality of the roster, but clearly the 2014-2015 squad didn't have enough to be a threat in the ACC.
During his first full season he was able to pull in one of the best classes in the country with three guys that are clearly ACC caliber, and by the time all three of them are done after the 2018-2019 season, I firmly believe that each could develop into an all-ACC type player. However, this season, they are true freshmen. To expect them to be all-world is unrealistic, but I think the fast start to the season gave people an unrealistic expectation for the rest of the season, especially in ACC play. This is arguably the deepest the ACC has been in several years, and Wake has played more ranked teams before the month of February than any other season in program history. I get it, we won some big, exciting non-con games and I was even starting to hope that we'd be a tourney contender. But the fact of the matter is, we are getting the majority of our minutes from a really good true freshman class and a sophomore class that was pieced together at the last minute. We have basically no juniors, and a couple of seniors (one of whom has played great, one of whom has struggled mightily). That's not a recipe for success, I don't care if John Wooden is coaching the team.
I say all of this because when you take a step back and look at this team, we still don't have the kind of roster we need to be a contender in the conference. One full recruiting cycle has been very successful for Manning, but that's not enough to fill a completely depleted roster. I think the guy deserves at least three years (and even that is not enough time in my opinion) before people start piling on him for poor coaching. I firmly believe that 90% of a team's success is based on roster talent. The coach can be the X factor that either pushes a team over the top or holds them back, but even a great coach can't make a team full of below-average players a contender. A lot of people will call attention to his use of timeouts, or his apparent distaste for zone defense and lay blame at his feet for the recent slide. But what about the fact that we are second worst in the conference in FT shooting and 3-point shooting? Is that really something that reflects Manning's shortcomings? I would argue that it's more a reflection of not having the right players. If we had more talent on the squad and we were even middle of the pack in those two statistical areas, I would argue that we probably would have won two or three of the ACC games we've lost.
Anyways, I just think we need to give the guy a chance and realize that this rebuild is probably a 4 year rebuild. Should that come as any surprise after what Bzzz did to the program? Trashing the guy publicly isn't going to do us any favors and will achieve the opposite of what our fanbase wants. My $.02
