I don’t know Mike Brey personally. I don’t know what he’s like outside of his public role. I’ve heard positive rumors and anecdotes. I’ve heard negative rumors and anecdotes. I say all this just to say that I’m not trying to unequivocally state, “Mike Brey’s a good guy.” I don’t know.
What I do know is that Mike Brey’s persona is that of a good guy. And that he, in my estimation, remains a good fit for Notre Dame. For at least another year.
Notre Dame is not a basketball school. It’s certainly not a men’s basketball school. Football is the thing, and women’s basketball’s the most successful program of those that get national airtime. Could someone have more success than Mike Brey at Notre Dame? Of course. But we don’t know how likely that is, or how easy that is, or how quickly they could do it.
There is a timing element to this. The roster next year is senior-heavy, with Paul Atkinson joining a talented, flawed class that’s failed to live up to expectations. The class, for better or worse, is of Brey’s assembly and development. The class, for better or worse, has one year left. The class, for whatever it’s worth, has gotten better, and may continue to get better going into next year.
But before we get more into that, let’s take stock of what’s happened in each of these last four seasons, all of which have been disappointing.
In 2017-18, Bonzie Colson and Matt Farrell missed a combined twenty games, and Notre Dame, rated the 11th-best team in the country by KenPom after winning the Maui Invitational, wound up losing their spot in the NCAA Tournament in cruel fashion: The Irish were the first team out of the field, victims of Davidson becoming a bid thief—winning the A-10 Tournament and narrowing the at-large field by one. Colson and Farrell weren’t the only ones injured, but they were the most prominent. And to be fair, Notre Dame had chances to avoid being at Davidson’s mercy: They lost to Ball State in the nonconference portion of the schedule. But still, it’s hard to say Notre Dame underachieved in 2017-18, because it’s hard to put any sort of label on what they should have achieved.
In 2018-19, there was no such close call. It was a rebuilding year. Rex Pflueger and Elijah Burns were the lone seniors, but Burns left the program in November and Pflueger tore his ACL in December. It was the freshman year for the Prentiss Hubb/Nate Laszewski/Dane Goodwin/Robby Carmody class. Carmody, as would become a trend, got hurt. The team played adequately through December, but it failed to compete in ACC play. Had Pflueger and Carmody stayed healthy, it’s doubtful Notre Dame would have made the tournament. Luck was not the problem. But the rebuilding year was not supposed to be that bad.
In 2019-20, with Pflueger back on a medical redshirt to join John Mooney and TJ Gibbs in a three-man senior class, Notre Dame should have been good enough to make the field. But they lost to Boston College in December at home, and they lost to Wake Forest on Leap Day on the road, and when the season ended the Irish were aimed for the NIT. Carmody did get hurt again, but that wasn’t the problem. The problems were a terrible loss, a bad loss, and either a lack of time or pick-your-tossup-game earlier in the season.
Then, there’s this year. Another rebuilding year on paper, with Mooney, Gibbs, and Plueger gone. There were signs of promise at times: After ND beat Duke, they were in position to at least make the NIT. But the team wilted down the stretch, needing heroics from a pair of transfers this week just to get past Wake Forest in the ACC Tournament. Carmody, again, is hurt.
And so, here we are. In three straight seasons, Notre Dame has underachieved. Two of those three seem to have been acknowledgeable rebuilding years, which is a high frequency of rebuilding years. The season after this next one also looks to be a rebuilding year, making it three of five, which is a very high frequency of rebuilding years. Is this disappointing? Yes. But it’s the situation.
The idea anyone with whom Notre Dame could replace Brey would do a better job with next year’s roster—low on defense, loaded with shooters, efficient with the basketball—is suspect. It’s a Mike Brey kind of team. It’s also a team with the talent to make the NCAA Tournament. If blowing up’s going to be done, why not wait a season, and avoid forfeiting what might be a good shot to make some noise?
No, Notre Dame’s men’s basketball program is not in good shape. Yes, it’s had three straight bad seasons for the first time since 2004-2006, with each of these seasons worse than each of those. Yes, there’s a point at which the school should move on from Mike Brey.
But is that time really now?
That depends on what Notre Dame wants out of the program. And that will differ depending on who one asks.
If the goal is to be a national title contender, then no, Mike Brey isn’t the guy. But finding the guy (or the gal) isn’t a can’t-miss process. There are risks of total program meltdown—of consignment to a noncompetitive five or ten years.
If the goal is to make the second weekend once a decade and to make the tournament more than half the time, Mike Brey’s the guy. You’ve gotta ride out this stretch after next season (or hope for a boatload of transfers/extra-eligibility guys), and you’ve gotta hope he makes next season work in the first place, and you’ve gotta keep an eye on whether he can bring in enough players to make it work again in a few years (again, the transfer development is intriguing), but this is what Brey’s shown he can do, and we’re not quite at the point of thinking he can no longer do it.
There’s a goal between those two, of course—one of making the tournament nearly every season and making the second weekend once every four or five years. Brey, for a bit, looked like he could do this. Notre Dame got a little lucky with the second of the back-to-back Elite Eight trips, but it was a little unlucky in 2011 to not make the Sweet Sixteen. If this is the goal, then sure, Notre Dame might want to move on, but again—wouldn’t it make more sense to give Brey another year, see how good that year is, determine whether that year’s good enough to tide you over for another rebuild (if another rebuild is necessary), and then make the call? Going after a coach to get you to this level bears the same risks as going for a title contention coach. There’s no guarantee anyone Notre Dame would hire would get Notre Dame to this stratum.
There isn’t a great answer here. It’s fair to want to try something new. But the timing makes retaining Brey this offseason sensible, and there’s another piece that backs that up:
Mike Brey is not a basketball brand the way Mike Krzyzewski is, or the way Rick Pitino is, or even the way John Calipari or Tom Izzo or Jim Boeheim is. He’s not at the level of notoriety of Jay Wright or Tony Bennett, either, but he’s close to that. Not all basketball fans know Mike Brey, but all college basketball fans do, the same way not all basketball fans know Wright or Bennett (or maybe Boeheim), but all college basketball fans do. Brey’s a big name in the sport. He’s an institution. Like Bob Huggins. And in a way unique to himself, he’s a positive institution.
There’s value in this. While it’s better for Notre Dame’s basketball program to make the NCAA Tournament and do well in it than to do poorly in it or miss it altogether, Brey brings Notre Dame attention, even when the team’s losing, in an amount that would be missed were he gone. He brings it attention nationally, and he brings it attention on campus, always playing the role of the athletic department’s favorite uncle—jovial, present, friendly. He’s “the loosest coach in America.” He was, at least during my time there, five to nine years ago, the most accessible coach on campus. If offered the choice between losing with Brey and losing with a hypothetical replacement, Notre Dame would do better to lose with Brey.
The assumption seems to be that Brey will, indeed, get another year, but there’s no real precedent for when any definitive statement will or won’t come out. Personally, I hope they keep him.
