eagle54
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,471
|
Post by eagle54 on Jun 4, 2016 18:44:02 GMT -5
However, this board continues to apologize for the million reasons we can't compete with the top programs and should be happy with what we get. eagle, the thing is, I don't think that's true (though you've called me an apologist in the past). Is there anybody that was really happy with last year? I don't think so. And I don't think anybody here would be happy with many more of those seasons. Do I think our program can be great? Yes, I do. We can certainly be a lot better than last year or 2014. I think all of us would agree that another season like 2015-2016 would be pretty unacceptable. And, at this point there won't be any coaching changes for next season, so I think all of us should (hopefully) agree that the best we can look forward to now is better success given our new players, assistants, and possibly new offensive and defensive strategy. Now, I do think there are certain factors affecting Georgetown that are barriers to success, but Villanova's example proves that they can be overcome to a large extent. Whether Villanova's success last year is a once in 30 year type of result or it continues is to be determined, but I certainly think that level of success is possible. All that being said, the problem is that monetary expenditure doesn't always correlate to college sports results. So, making all decisions through that prism alone can lead to some bad (or at the very least, ill advised) decision making. I would also note that while JT3 might be in or near the top 10 in salary, I am pretty sure we are not in the top 10 when it comes to revenue and expenditures. Schools like Texas have enormous edges when it comes to finances, even if that is not reflected entirely in salary. Keep in mind that some of the expenditures attributed to football at places like Texas can indirectly help basketball too. It is very easy to play with sports accounting in college budgets, too, so all numbers need to be taken with a grain of salt. I think all of us agree we want to win and we want to win soon. Agreed with your points but need to be a bit more urgent as it's been more than last year. I know we somehow celebrate these regular season successes and flame-outs but need some real success soon as this act is getting old.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,597
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Jun 5, 2016 11:12:32 GMT -5
Does Kansas still really play football? 0-12 last season, 9-51 over the last five seasons, and only eight winning seasons in the last forty years. If they just put eleven blocking dummies out there, would anyone notice? There's no good reason why Kansas can't be strong in football. Unless your school puts barriers around a program (for another board and another topic) nearly any school can be a competitive program. KU's problem has been coaching - consistent coaching turnover and poor choices dating back to Terry Allen and Mark Mangino, Turner Gill and Charley Weis, who not only took a $19 million buyout from ND, he took $5.6 million more from KU. But they asked for it by hiring him in the first place. College sports is all about coaching. This is really a remarkable statement. It's like economics, politics (institutional, local, state, and national), history, culture, and geographic context mean nothing. And here I thought it was SFSers who were overly enamored with Great Man Theory. I guess it makes sense that business school types would also fall for its charms. Schools don't just "put barriers around program" for no reason, just because they feel like it. They are responding to a vast, complex, and dynamic set of constraints, preferences, and socioeconomic forces. To pretend that any school could just snap its fingers and become good at football (or anything), if only a couple of leaders and coaches want it enough, is magical thinking at its most sophomoric (pun decidedly intended).
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,736
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jun 5, 2016 12:20:21 GMT -5
Schools don't just "put barriers around program" for no reason, just because they feel like it. They are responding to a vast, complex, and dynamic set of constraints, preferences, and socioeconomic forces. To pretend that any school could just snap its fingers and become good at football (or anything), if only a couple of leaders and coaches want it enough, is magical thinking at its most sophomoric (pun decidedly intended). I'm not sure what "dynamic set of constraints, preferences, and socioeconomic forces" make the flagship Kansas football a perennial non-starter while the windswept highway stop of Manhattan has produced 20 years of serious football, but I'll suggest Bill Snyder has a lot to do with that argument. Coaching makes a huge difference...good and bad. www.houstonchronicle.com/sports/college-football/article/Rise-of-Baylor-TCU-takes-longtime-rivalry-to-new-6446837.php
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,597
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Jun 5, 2016 14:13:55 GMT -5
Well, much of my step-father's family happens to be from Kansas, so I do have some insights into that dynamic, but I would generalize by saying "the same ones that explain how the sleepy college town of Lawrence is home to 8 Final Fours and 22 regular season conference titles in the last 30 years, while K State has 0 and 1, respectively. Coaches make a difference, but they can also be changed fairly easily. All the other stuff cannot, and so you get some very divergent outcomes over time.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,736
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jun 5, 2016 15:44:05 GMT -5
Well, much of my step-father's family happens to be from Kansas, so I do have some insights into that dynamic, but I would generalize by saying "the same ones that explain how the sleepy college town of Lawrence is home to 8 Final Fours and 22 regular season conference titles in the last 30 years, while K State has 0 and 1, respectively. Coaches make a difference, but they can also be changed fairly easily. All the other stuff cannot, and so you get some very divergent outcomes over time. In some sense the forces you describe [let's call it the System] is the engine to success but without the right coach, it's not going to succeed. The Alabama System excels under Nick Saban where it did not under Mike DuBose, Dennis Franchione and Mike Shula. Systems are not absolute and do change: see TCU, Duke (since Cutcliffe), and to some degree, Oregon. The Baylor system certainly changed and the results are in the papers. Those that have resisted are outliers of a sort: Army, for example. But in basketball, it's a slightly different dynamic because the systems are seen as much bigger than the coach. But why has DePaul been utterly incapable of any serious progress? Nothing in its DNA is holding basketball back, or is it?
|
|
hoyas315
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,096
|
Post by hoyas315 on Dec 15, 2016 18:26:28 GMT -5
|
|
lichoya68
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
OK YOUNGINS ARE HERE AND ARE VERY VERY GOOD cant wait GO HOYAS
Posts: 17,438
|
Post by lichoya68 on Dec 16, 2016 13:24:19 GMT -5
keep big east TEN yup doing just FINE imo GO HOYAS STEP IT UP BEAT CUSE silence the doubters YUP
|
|