NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,927
|
Post by NCHoya on Mar 17, 2015 11:06:30 GMT -5
My prediction - this thread will be irrelevant after this weekend. Go HOYAS!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Mar 17, 2015 11:07:49 GMT -5
We have had this discussion for years. I'm afraid some of us (all loyal Hoya fans) forget how ridiculously impossible it is for a small, private school like ours to get to the final four and actually win a national championship. Since Nova beat us in '85 no such school not named Duke has won a national championship. And since I don't have the time to actually look this up (but I'm sure someone will) of the 120 teams to make the final four over those years I would bet not more than 15-20% (other than Duke) were small, private schools. And remember what we are working with. High academic standards, no on-campus arena, no elaborate athletes living facilities, and generally a student and alumni base (present company excluded) that doesn't live and die for their sports teams. We are damn lucky to have as successful and clean program as we have. So yes, we should probably have won more of our first round games and the losses still hurt but let's not lose sight of the forest for the trees. JT 3 revitalized a moribund program and kept us competitive in a very tough environment. He and his teams have given us some great victories and plenty of enjoyable moments, e.g. Seton Hall last week. This is a really good point. Since 1990, the following schools have won the NCAA Championship: UNLV, Duke (4), UNC (3), Arkansas, UCLA, Kentucky (3), Arizona, Connecticut (4), Michigan State, Maryland, Syracuse, Florida (2), Kansas, Louisville. So in 25 tournaments, 5 schools have won 16. That means that only 5 schools have won over 60% of the tournaments in the last 25 years. If you aren't one of the top programs that win a lot more than everybody else, your odds of winning the tournament are not very good. The same goes for the Sweet 16. With only 16 teams making it every year (and a ton of repeats from year to year), it's actually not that easy to make it very far in the post-season. That's why judging a season solely by a single-elimination tournament in March makes little sense. As I've said many times before, if we keep making it to March with a good seed, the wins will come. I have a good feeling about this year.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,780
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 17, 2015 11:18:50 GMT -5
DFW always posts that without context but there's a huge flaw in the "expenses" ranking -- teams that pay rent have that huge expense in their budget. Teams that pay for a $60M stadium rarely have the capital depreciation directly allocated to the men's basketball budget as the venue is used across sports and usually left at the total Athletic Dept level or even university level (if it's a convocation center as well). Except Marquette doesn't have a big arena bill. In fact, it's a small fraction of what Georgetown pays. www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/stories/2006/10/23/daily39.htmlDamn, that is cheap. Consider me corrected. What the heck are they spending money on? I would say that these things are still subject to amazing amount of accounting shenanigans.
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Mar 17, 2015 11:21:51 GMT -5
2005: Missed tourney 2006: 7 seed 2007: 2 seed 2008: 2 seed 2009: Missed tourney 2010: 3 seed 2011: 6 seed 2012: 3 seed 2013: 2 seed 2014: Missed tourney 2015: 4 seed
This is an extraordinary sustained run of being an elite program. It is jaw-dropping how quickly we got here given the depths of the Esherick era. You don't have this kind of year-in-year-out top 30 level success under an average much less poor coach.
Anyone who wants to weigh the results of 5 (or even 6 games) over these decade-long results is an idiot. Thank god they aren't in charge of the program.
I get that emotionally and in terms of media perception the tournament results are overwhelming. But grow up. There is no rational argument for this thread even existing. That remains true with a loss in the single game being played on Thursday. The tournament runs have come and will again. But they are largely a crapshoot.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Mar 17, 2015 11:36:18 GMT -5
2005: Missed tourney 2006: 7 seed 2007: 2 seed 2008: 2 seed 2009: Missed tourney 2010: 3 seed 2011: 6 seed 2012: 3 seed 2013: 2 seed 2014: Missed tourney 2015: 4 seed This is an extraordinary sustained run of being an elite program. It is jaw-dropping how quickly we got here given the depths of the Esherick era. You don't have this kind of year-in-year-out top 30 level success under an average much less poor coach. Anyone who wants to weigh the results of 5 (or even 6 games) over these decade-long results is an idiot. Thank god they aren't in charge of the program. I get that emotionally and in terms of media perception the tournament results are overwhelming. But grow up. There is no rational argument for this thread even existing. That remains true with a loss in the single game being played on Thursday. The tournament runs have come and will again. But they are largely a crapshoot. Don't forget three regular season Big East Titles, 1 BET title and two other BET finals appearances, all accomplished in the best/deepest conference in the modern era.
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,604
|
Post by guru on Mar 17, 2015 11:41:29 GMT -5
2005: Missed tourney 2006: 7 seed 2007: 2 seed 2008: 2 seed 2009: Missed tourney 2010: 3 seed 2011: 6 seed 2012: 3 seed 2013: 2 seed 2014: Missed tourney 2015: 4 seed This is an extraordinary sustained run of being an elite program. It is jaw-dropping how quickly we got here given the depths of the Esherick era. You don't have this kind of year-in-year-out top 30 level success under an average much less poor coach. Anyone who wants to weigh the results of 5 (or even 6 games) over these decade-long results is an idiot. Thank god they aren't in charge of the program. I get that emotionally and in terms of media perception the tournament results are overwhelming. But grow up. There is no rational argument for this thread even existing. That remains true with a loss in the single game being played on Thursday. The tournament runs have come and will again. But they are largely a crapshoot. That list is impressive, and speaks to JT3's greatest strength as a coach: Scheduling. The guy has the formula for seeding success down to a science. As a tournament coach, however, he has been a train wreck for the better part of 8 seasons now. It's easy to wipe all of those away as random results, but I don't think it's honest. By his own standards, he divides the season into four parts: The non-conference portion of the season, the conference portion of the season, the Big East Tournament and the NCAAs. Here's how he has done during those 4 portions of the season since 2010: Non-conference record: 56-10 Big East conference: 66-42 Big East Tournament: 3-6 NCAA Tournament: 1-4 The guy's teams knock it out of the park before the New Year, usually hold their own in conference, then gas out in the postseason. On his four fronts, he has been successful on only half of them. And all that good work done early in seasons has been completely undone by what has happened in the postseason. JT3's job is clearly secure, and with good reason. He's a good man and representative of the University. IMO, though, he ranks out as an average basketball coach. He's running a fine, clean program. But let's not pretend what has happened in the tourney recently is all just bad luck. I just don't buy that. So let's start to reverse that narrative this week.
|
|
HoyaChris
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,408
|
Post by HoyaChris on Mar 17, 2015 11:44:49 GMT -5
2005: Missed tourney 2006: 7 seed 2007: 2 seed 2008: 2 seed 2009: Missed tourney 2010: 3 seed 2011: 6 seed 2012: 3 seed 2013: 2 seed 2014: Missed tourney 2015: 4 seed This is an extraordinary sustained run of being an elite program. It is jaw-dropping how quickly we got here given the depths of the Esherick era. You don't have this kind of year-in-year-out top 30 level success under an average much less poor coach. Anyone who wants to weigh the results of 5 (or even 6 games) over these decade-long results is an idiot. Thank god they aren't in charge of the program. I get that emotionally and in terms of media perception the tournament results are overwhelming. But grow up. There is no rational argument for this thread even existing. That remains true with a loss in the single game being played on Thursday. The tournament runs have come and will again. But they are largely a crapshoot. Don't forget three regular season Big East Titles, 1 BET title and two other BET finals appearances, all accomplished in the best/deepest conference in the modern era. All of the above. Plus, a program whose adherence to the rules and recruitment of fine young men is consistent with the aspirations of the University.
|
|
miamihoya
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 698
|
Post by miamihoya on Mar 17, 2015 11:47:27 GMT -5
Since JTIII took over 2005, the following teams have made more appearances than Georgetown in the AP top-25 poll:
Duke: 210 Kansas: 190 UNC: 168 Michigan St: 165 Louisville: 158 Gonzaga: 148 Syracuse: 145 Ohio St.: 143 Wisconsin: 139 Kentucky: 135 Pittsburgh: 135 UConn: 133 Texas: 127 Florida: 126 Villanova: 126 Georgetown: 121
Among those ahead, only Duke, Syracuse (via probation worthy behavior), Nova and Gonzaga are private schools, and only Nova and the Zags don't play BCS football. Sitting behind Georgetown during that span are traditional "blue bloods" such as Indiana, Arizona and UCLA, programs with massive athletic budgets such as Oklahoma, Notre Dame and Michigan, and regional rivals such as Maryland and Virginia.
|
|
miamihoya
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 698
|
Post by miamihoya on Mar 17, 2015 11:51:17 GMT -5
Here's how he has done during those 4 portions of the season since 2010: Non-conference record: 56-10 Big East conference: 66-42 Big East Tournament: 3-6 NCAA Tournament: 1-4 It is very convenient to your argument to use 2010 as the starting point and ignore the results prior to such year.
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Mar 17, 2015 11:51:41 GMT -5
2005: Missed tourney 2006: 7 seed 2007: 2 seed 2008: 2 seed 2009: Missed tourney 2010: 3 seed 2011: 6 seed 2012: 3 seed 2013: 2 seed 2014: Missed tourney 2015: 4 seed This is an extraordinary sustained run of being an elite program. It is jaw-dropping how quickly we got here given the depths of the Esherick era. You don't have this kind of year-in-year-out top 30 level success under an average much less poor coach. Anyone who wants to weigh the results of 5 (or even 6 games) over these decade-long results is an idiot. Thank god they aren't in charge of the program. I get that emotionally and in terms of media perception the tournament results are overwhelming. But grow up. There is no rational argument for this thread even existing. That remains true with a loss in the single game being played on Thursday. The tournament runs have come and will again. But they are largely a crapshoot. That list is impressive, and speaks to JT3's greatest strength as a coach: Scheduling. The guy has the formula for seeding success down to a science. As a tournament coach, however, he has been a train wreck for the better part of 8 seasons now. It's easy to wipe all of those away as random results, but I don't think it's honest. By his own standards, he divides the season into four parts: The non-conference portion of the season, the conference portion of the season, the Big East Tournament and the NCAAs. Here's how he has done during those 4 portions of the season since 2010: Non-conference record: 56-10 Big East conference: 66-42 Big East Tournament: 3-6 NCAA Tournament: 1-4 The guy's teams knock it out of the park before the New Year, usually hold their own in conference, then gas out in the postseason. On his four fronts, he has been successful on only half of them. And all that good work done early in seasons has been completely undone by what has happened in the postseason. JT3's job is clearly secure, and with good reason. He's a good man and representative of the University. IMO, though, he ranks out as an average basketball coach. He's running a fine, clean program. But let's not pretend what has happened in the tourney recently is all just bad luck. I just don't buy that. So let's start to reverse that narrative this week. If you think scheduling is how you get to a Hall of Fane caliber record of success over a decade, and not, you know, winning a load of basketball games, I don't know what to tell you. And what possible basis is there for cutting off results prior to 2010 other than to drive a silly emotionally-based agenda? His NCAA record is 7-6. His overall BET record is great. I wish the NCAA record were better. But basic science tells you the last 5 years are almost certainly a fluke and in no way representative of any kind of deficiency in tourney coaching. That becomes even clearer when you account for the insanely bad luck of drawing VCU and Davidson when we did. If you have a different, consistent theory that explains and applies to all 5 games that also accounts for the hundreds of wins, you haven't offered it. None of this means he can't be criticized or that there isn't room for improvement. But the hysterics are so obviously about emotion rather than reality, I can't believe Georgetown graduates can't easily separate the two.
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,604
|
Post by guru on Mar 17, 2015 11:52:03 GMT -5
Here's how he has done during those 4 portions of the season since 2010: Non-conference record: 56-10 Big East conference: 66-42 Big East Tournament: 3-6 NCAA Tournament: 1-4 It is very convenient to your argument to use 2010 as the starting point and ignore the results prior to such year. Actually, not really. 2009 was a dumpster fire.
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,604
|
Post by guru on Mar 17, 2015 11:56:41 GMT -5
That list is impressive, and speaks to JT3's greatest strength as a coach: Scheduling. The guy has the formula for seeding success down to a science. As a tournament coach, however, he has been a train wreck for the better part of 8 seasons now. It's easy to wipe all of those away as random results, but I don't think it's honest. By his own standards, he divides the season into four parts: The non-conference portion of the season, the conference portion of the season, the Big East Tournament and the NCAAs. Here's how he has done during those 4 portions of the season since 2010: Non-conference record: 56-10 Big East conference: 66-42 Big East Tournament: 3-6 NCAA Tournament: 1-4 The guy's teams knock it out of the park before the New Year, usually hold their own in conference, then gas out in the postseason. On his four fronts, he has been successful on only half of them. And all that good work done early in seasons has been completely undone by what has happened in the postseason. JT3's job is clearly secure, and with good reason. He's a good man and representative of the University. IMO, though, he ranks out as an average basketball coach. He's running a fine, clean program. But let's not pretend what has happened in the tourney recently is all just bad luck. I just don't buy that. So let's start to reverse that narrative this week. If you think scheduling is how you get to a Hall of Fane caliber record of success over a decade, and not, you know, winning a Editedload of basketball games, I don't know what to tell you. And what possible basis is there for cutting off results prior to 2010 other than to drive a silly emotionally-based agenda? His NCAA record is 7-6. His overall BET record is great. I wish the NCAA record were better. But basic science tells you the last 5 years are almost certainly a fluke and in no way representative of any kind of deficiency in tourney coaching. That becomes even clearer when you account for the insanely bad luck of drawing VCU and Davidson when we did. If you have a different, consistent theory that explains and applies to all 5 games that also accounts for the hundreds of wins, you haven't offered it. None of this means he can't be criticized or that there isn't room for improvement. But the hysterics are so obviously about emotion rather than reality, I can't believe Georgetown graduates can't easily separate the two. Wait, what? Did you just infer that JT3 is a Hall of Fame coach? If so, don't know what to tell you. That's amazing (to me). As for the cutoff, I thought I was being kind by not including 2009 in the mix. Clearly, we had an awesome run in 2006-2008, which becomes less relevant with each passing year, wouldn't you agree? And I don't really see the hysterics, honestly. Not even close to calling for his job - just saying your take on it seems to be the rosiest one possible. HOF - honestly!
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Mar 17, 2015 12:00:47 GMT -5
If you think scheduling is how you get to a Hall of Fane caliber record of success over a decade, and not, you know, winning a Editedload of basketball games, I don't know what to tell you. And what possible basis is there for cutting off results prior to 2010 other than to drive a silly emotionally-based agenda? His NCAA record is 7-6. His overall BET record is great. I wish the NCAA record were better. But basic science tells you the last 5 years are almost certainly a fluke and in no way representative of any kind of deficiency in tourney coaching. That becomes even clearer when you account for the insanely bad luck of drawing VCU and Davidson when we did. If you have a different, consistent theory that explains and applies to all 5 games that also accounts for the hundreds of wins, you haven't offered it. None of this means he can't be criticized or that there isn't room for improvement. But the hysterics are so obviously about emotion rather than reality, I can't believe Georgetown graduates can't easily separate the two. Wait, what? Did you just infer that JT3 is a Hall of Fame coach? If so, don't know what to tell you. That's amazing (to me). As for the cutoff, I thought I was being kind by not including 2009 in the mix. Clearly, we had an awesome run in 2006-2008, which becomes less relevant with each passing year, wouldn't you agree? And I don't really see the hysterics, honestly. Not even close to calling for his job - just saying your take on it seems to be the rosiest one possible. HOF - honestly! I said HOF-caliber reg.-season performance. Is there any meaningful gap between III's regular season run and any given ten-year performance of somebody like Boeheim? Obviously ten years doesnt get you into the HOF. Whatever, man. You are entitled to be an emotional irrational basket case if you want to. Fans usually are. I am capable of felling that way. But "hot seat" type discussion, which you are disclaiming anyway? Foolish.
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,604
|
Post by guru on Mar 17, 2015 12:08:04 GMT -5
Wait, what? Did you just infer that JT3 is a Hall of Fame coach? If so, don't know what to tell you. That's amazing (to me). As for the cutoff, I thought I was being kind by not including 2009 in the mix. Clearly, we had an awesome run in 2006-2008, which becomes less relevant with each passing year, wouldn't you agree? And I don't really see the hysterics, honestly. Not even close to calling for his job - just saying your take on it seems to be the rosiest one possible. HOF - honestly! I said HOF-caliber reg.-season performance. Is there any meaningful gap between III's regular season run and any given ten-year performance of somebody like Boeheim? Obviously ten years doesnt get you into the HOF. Whatever, man. You are entitled to be an emotional irrational basket case if you want to. Fans usually are. I am capable of felling that way. But "hot seat" type discussion, which you are disclaiming anyway? Foolish. Irrational emotional basket case? Um, OK? I think maybe saying he's a Hall of Fame "regular season" coach is probably the closest thing to irrational in this exchange, but if you need to vent, fire away. And with that I will take my leave of this very odd exchange.
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Mar 17, 2015 12:20:57 GMT -5
I said HOF-caliber reg.-season performance. Is there any meaningful gap between III's regular season run and any given ten-year performance of somebody like Boeheim? Obviously ten years doesnt get you into the HOF. Whatever, man. You are entitled to be an emotional irrational basket case if you want to. Fans usually are. I am capable of felling that way. But "hot seat" type discussion, which you are disclaiming anyway? Foolish. Irrational emotional basket case? Um, OK? I think maybe saying he's a Hall of Fame "regular season" coach is probably the closest thing to irrational in this exchange, but if you need to vent, fire away. And with that I will take my leave of this very odd exchange. Right. Why confront directly my point or response when you can just bail? Is there any meaningful difference between III's last 10 years and what Boeheim did at Syracuse in the 90s? Maybe one extra Sweet Sixteen?
|
|
Cambridge
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Canes Pugnaces
Posts: 5,304
|
Post by Cambridge on Mar 17, 2015 12:28:15 GMT -5
Here is his complete record (2005-2015) compared with a well-regarded mystery Big East Coach: JTIII Non-conf record: 119-30 (.799) ?? Non-Conf record: 141-40 (.779) JTIII BE conf record: 119-73 (.620) with 3 BE regular season Championships ?? BE conf record: 125-67 (.651) with 2 BE regular season Championships JTIII BET record: 11-11 (.500) with one Championship and two other finals ?? BET record: 10-10 (.500) with one Championship and no other trip to finals JTIII NCAA record: 8-7 (.533) with trips to Final 4 and Sweet 16, but with 2 exits in Round of 32 and 3 in First Round ?? NCAA record: 13-9 (.591) with trips to Final 4, Elite 8, 2 Sweet 16s, but with 2 exits in Round of 32 and 3 in First Round Obviously, that coach is Jay Wright. He has one Elite 8 and one more trip to Sweet 16 over JTIII in the same span of time...but he has 1 less BE regular season title and 2 less trips to the BET Final and the same number of embarrassing flameouts in the NCAA.
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,604
|
Post by guru on Mar 17, 2015 12:29:10 GMT -5
Irrational emotional basket case? Um, OK? I think maybe saying he's a Hall of Fame "regular season" coach is probably the closest thing to irrational in this exchange, but if you need to vent, fire away. And with that I will take my leave of this very odd exchange. Right. Why confront directly my point or response when you can just bail? Is there any meaningful difference between III's last 10 years and what Boeheim did at Syracuse in the 90s? Maybe one extra Sweet Sixteen? So you want me to defend Jim Boeheim in the 90s? Again, odd. And ok, then your point seems to be that III could maybe potentially be a HOF coach if his career trajectory mimics Jim Boeheim's after the 90s? Don't really want to continue this. Call it bailing if you want - you seem to be too worked up and taking this debate awfully personally. Go Hoyas.
|
|
This Just In
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Bold Prediction: The Hoyas will win at least 1 BE game in 2023.
Posts: 10,592
|
Post by This Just In on Mar 17, 2015 12:35:41 GMT -5
Would you rather see mediocre (or worse) teams playing in the NIT (or with no post season bid at all) almost every year? Because that is what you would most likely get if we replaced JTIII with any of the coaches we could convince to come to Georgetown to replace him. That's a strange argument- -at a salary of $2.8 million a year and a the 10th largest basketball budget in Division I, Georgetown is such a difficult place to recruit that no one can win there? This isn't Georgetown football we're talking about. www.bbstate.com/info/teams-hoopsbudgetCoach Thompson has a solid foundation at Georgetown because, like all the other GU coaches, post-season performance is not a driver of job security. If it were, 23 or 24 head coaches would be out the door and that's not what the program is about. Question 1: Do you wish to comment on whether you believe the Hoyas will make it to the Sweet Sixteen? Question 2: Every other poster keeps repeating that the school cannot get a coach as good as JTIII but a 2.8 million per year salary is not chump change and neither is having the 10th largest basketball budget in Division I. Based on the figures above how does this mesh with the narrative that JTIII is as good as it gets or that the post-season has not been underwhelming?
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Mar 17, 2015 13:00:27 GMT -5
Right. Why confront directly my point or response when you can just bail? Is there any meaningful difference between III's last 10 years and what Boeheim did at Syracuse in the 90s? Maybe one extra Sweet Sixteen? So you want me to defend Jim Boeheim in the 90s? Again, odd. And ok, then your point seems to be that III could maybe potentially be a HOF coach if his career trajectory mimics Jim Boeheim's after the 90s? Don't really want to continue this. Call it bailing if you want - you seem to be too worked up and taking this debate awfully personally. Go Hoyas. I think you're making far too much of a throw-off adjective used to make a more important point--JTIII's coaching performance has been at an elite level outside of five basketball games, two of which came against all-time underseeded teams. End of story.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Mar 17, 2015 13:01:18 GMT -5
That's a strange argument- -at a salary of $2.8 million a year and a the 10th largest basketball budget in Division I, Georgetown is such a difficult place to recruit that no one can win there? This isn't Georgetown football we're talking about. www.bbstate.com/info/teams-hoopsbudgetCoach Thompson has a solid foundation at Georgetown because, like all the other GU coaches, post-season performance is not a driver of job security. If it were, 23 or 24 head coaches would be out the door and that's not what the program is about. Question 1: Do you wish to comment on whether you believe the Hoyas will make it to the Sweet Sixteen? Question 2: Every other poster keeps repeating that the school cannot get a coach as good as JTIII but a 2.8 million per year salary is not chump change and neither is having the 10th largest basketball budget in Division I. Based on the figures above how does this mesh with the narrative that JTIII is as good as it gets or that the post-season has not been underwhelming? (1) I do. I believe they will win Thursday. And I believe they will win Saturday. But I think the game Saturday (if it's Utah) will be more or less a tossup, and I won't be gutted if they lose. It's, of course, conceivable that they'll lose Thursday, in which case I probably will be gutted, but I think the odds are very good that they'll win. (2) Having a large budget, a large paycheck, and significant name recognition are all positives, no doubt. And, of course, Georgetown could get a coach as good as JTIII if they went a different direction. But the indisputable fact is that there really aren't very many coaches who (1) don't already have a job with similar pay or budget; and (2) have had the level of consistent success that would allow you to predict success here. Remember, it is a truism that you have to make the NCAAs before you can win a game in them. Consistent qualification is a prerequisite for consistent success. How many coaches over the last ten years have even been in the NCAAs as often as JTIII? Just in our league, I believe the answer is one. It's not that it's impossible to do better; it's that the significant risks (particularly at this precise moment in our program's history) significantly outweigh the possible benefits. And that will be true no matter what happens Thursday or Saturday. I would be willing to bet my house that if you looked at every hire by a "power" school (however you want to define that) over the last ten years that most of those hires fail to make the NCAAs as consistently as JTIII.
|
|