SDHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,326
Member is Online
|
Post by SDHoya on Mar 22, 2015 13:15:32 GMT -5
I refuse to be realistic.
National Champs 2016.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2015 13:17:49 GMT -5
Georgetown is no longer an elite program, and I have no expectation that they will change. JTIII is a good coach, not a great coach. If a top 25 program was looking to hire, JTIII would not be on anyone's short list. In the college game, coaching is the X factor. GU will remain highly competitive, but will not make the jump to the next level. Quite frankly, I like it just the way it is. I never get these statements. At what point in your mind did we stop being an Elite Program, and what does that even mean? Is Xavier an Elite program or Indiana? If we go to a Final Four next year will we be an Elite program again suddenly? Not trying to be snarky just looking for clarification on what that means exactly. What is an Elite team according to you or others that claim we are not and never will be again...
|
|
jwp91
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,998
|
Post by jwp91 on Mar 22, 2015 13:40:42 GMT -5
Expectations in order of priority 1. a program that has integrity 2. players who meet their academic obligations and a staff that demands that they do 3. staff and players who represent the university well 4. a program that complements the other parts of the university in contributing to the personal, academic, and professional (basketball and otherwise) development of the athletes 5. a team that is competitive for the Big East title in most years and wins it as often as any other program in our league 6. a team that regularly makes the ncaa tournament (say 75% of the time) 7. a team that makes a deep run in the tournament every 4-5 years (more often than we have in the recent past) By these standards, JTIII has been an excellent coach. Well put....I would bump #6 to 90%. Missing the tourney 1 of 4 years would be too much.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,924
|
Post by NCHoya on Mar 22, 2015 13:49:41 GMT -5
In today's "Football is God" NCAA structure, Georgetown is an outsider and an exception to the norm. For that I am thankful. It would very easy for this program to fade away given the built-in advantages all the Big 5 schools have over everyone else in terms of money and power in NCAA sports. Like it or not, we must accept this reality as the context when we envision the reasonable expectations for our program.
With that in mind, I see no reason why Georgetown should not be viewed as the face of the Big East going forward. Making the NCAAs should always be the first goal every season and should be achieved 85% of the time. Winning the Big east regular season should also be a regular occurrence, not an exception. I would not want to be in a conference where we would dominate like Gonzaga in the WCC or Memphis when they were in CUSA, however, Georgetown should always be in the conversation when discussing contenders for the BE title and always be in the top-half of the conference. I would say winning it 4 times every decade would be about right for me.
As for performance in the NCAAs. This is the trickiest of all. Personally, I think the NCAAs is a complete crapshoot and cannot be weighted very heavily. I look at Xavier this year, they are in the Sweet 16 because they played one of the last 4 teams in the field and then a #14 seed. If we get a draw like that does it mean we accomplished so much more than a year like this one? In my mind, not at all. However, it seems that is all anyone measures a team by so it is important.
So I would say we should make the Sweet 16 50% of the time we are in the tourney. That is a pretty high hurdle, but it should be the expectation. We are rarely a lower seeded team and I expect the favorable seeding to continue. As for Final 4s, I have no clue how to measure that at all. So many great coaches have not made a Final 4 and they are still really good teams and coaches. I have nothing to say there.
To me, the key is being relevant and in the conversation every single year. That is the expectation. That no one ignores Georgetown when they play their team and a national conversation cannot be complete without mention of the Big East and the Hoyas.
|
|
CTHoya08
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Bring back Izzo!
Posts: 2,853
|
Post by CTHoya08 on Mar 22, 2015 14:01:54 GMT -5
I generally agree with Loyal Hoya's list.
Be among the top four teams in the Big East regular season standings every year.
Win the conference regular season and tournament titles as much as any other program in the league. I agree that we don't want to have a league so imbalanced that it becomes WCC-East, but I don't think we want any other team (and certainly not Villanova) to be the conference hegemon.
Qualify for the NCAA tournament 80% of the time, and be on the bubble/in the NIT every other year. So far under JTIII we've qualified 73% of the time (8/11).
Make a deep (Sweet Sixteen or further) run 50% of the time we're in the tournament. Obviously this is something we haven't achieved lately. (I don't care whether we string together multiple NIT wins in the years we miss the tournament. I just put NIT qualification in to make clear that we should be able to avoid total disaster seasons.)
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Mar 22, 2015 14:02:02 GMT -5
Villanova screwed all of us by humiliating the league for the second-straight year--it will take years now for the conference to get out of this respect whole. But help is coming. The Hoyas will be very interesting next year. Marquette has an absolutely loaded recruiting class coming in--as much as I hate to admit it they need to be taking it to people.
In the meantime, we are all Xavier Musketeers now.
|
|
beenaround
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,473
|
Post by beenaround on Mar 22, 2015 14:02:16 GMT -5
In today's "Football is God" NCAA structure, Georgetown is an outsider and an exception to the norm. For that I am thankful. It would very easy for this program to fade away given the built-in advantages all the Big 5 schools have over everyone else in terms of money and power in NCAA sports. Like it or not, we must accept this reality as the context when we envision the reasonable expectations for our program. With that in mind, I see no reason why Georgetown should not be viewed as the face of the Big East going forward. Making the NCAAs should always be the first goal every season and should be achieved 85% of the time. Winning the Big east regular season should also be a regular occurrence, not an exception. I would not want to be in a conference where we would dominate like Gonzaga in the WCC or Memphis when they were in CUSA, however, Georgetown should always be in the conversation when discussing contenders for the BE title and always be in the top-half of the conference. I would say winning it 4 times every decade would be about right for me. As for performance in the NCAAs. This is the trickiest of all. Personally, I think the NCAAs is a complete crapshoot and cannot be weighted very heavily. I look at Xavier this year, they are in the Sweet 16 because they played one of the last 4 teams in the field and then a #14 seed. If we get a draw like that does it mean we accomplished so much more than a year like this one? In my mind, not at all. However, it seems that is all anyone measures a team by so it is important. So I would say we should make the Sweet 16 50% of the time we are in the tourney. That is a pretty high hurdle, but it should be the expectation. We are rarely a lower seeded team and I expect the favorable seeding to continue. As for Final 4s, I have no clue how to measure that at all. So many great coaches have not made a Final 4 and they are still really good teams and coaches. I have nothing to say there. To me, the key is being relevant and in the conversation every single year. That is the expectation. That no one ignores Georgetown when they play their team and a national conversation cannot be complete without mention of the Big East and the Hoyas. I think the goals you set are completely reasonable. Some folks around here want much more than I think is reasonable, given the current college sports landscape. However, others seem to have set the bar extremely low, perhaps to avoid feeling disappointment. Consistent NCAA tourney participation with Sweet 16 every two years, or so is a legit goal for the program.
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,333
|
Post by daveg023 on Mar 22, 2015 14:05:48 GMT -5
So I hate to be negative, but if we all agree that these are the expectations, isn't it safe to say we have not met these targets for the last 8 years? Isn't it fair that our coach should take some blame for this?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2015 14:19:29 GMT -5
So I hate to be negative, but if we all agree that these are the expectations, isn't it safe to say we have not met these targets for the last 8 years? Isn't it fair that our coach should take some blame for this? I don’t think we all agree on anything besides the color of the uniforms we wear...
|
|
bamahoya11
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,831
|
Post by bamahoya11 on Mar 22, 2015 14:20:31 GMT -5
My expectation of Georgetown is that it consistently ranks as a top 15-20 basketball program. To me, that tends to mean: (1) top 20-30 recruiting classes on a regular basis; (2) wins over top 10 competition during the regular season; (3) contention for conference titles (top four in our league now each year); (4) regularly making the tournament; and (5) having a championship "plan."
To me, we are excelling in four of these areas and finally making substantial progress in the fifth. I choose not to judge the program by whether we can make a magical run to the Sweet 16 at some point or even the Elite 8. A lot of programs can put together such runs, and it doesn't make them elite. Instead, I want to see the type or consistent recruiting and player development that keeps you in contention year in and out.
When JTIII got here, I don't think he was ready for that challenge. His immediate role was to win with the cast he had and make the program relevant. Although we recruited well, we didn't always get players that fit our program. Now, though, we are stockpiling talent and I feel good with the trajectory. As for me, I think our program is primed for a run with this year'a freshman class. I'll be more concerned if that doesn't happen.
|
|
kettlehill
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,139
Member is Online
|
Post by kettlehill on Mar 22, 2015 14:26:54 GMT -5
As long as JT3 is coach. I am confident that we will be a competitive top 20, sometime top 10 program, with the right kind of student/athletes. In the short term, I think we should expect top ten next year, perhaps final four. A lot depends on Govan: will he be ready? I see our success next year initiating a good/excellent recruiting trend which will keep us in the top ten mix for the next ten years, but this will all be a waiting game, a pleasant holding pattern for the arrival of the coach of our next NCAA championship team: Jabril Trawick.
|
|
|
Post by HoyasAreHungry on Mar 22, 2015 14:29:11 GMT -5
So I hate to be negative, but if we all agree that these are the expectations, isn't it safe to say we have not met these targets for the last 8 years? Isn't it fair that our coach should take some blame for this? I'm confused by this statement. All of the "expectations" you've laid out in the initial post have been met the last 8 years other than the sweet 16's. That is what makes it all the more frustrating. Our tourney results haven't met those expectations, but we've been there and consistently been ranked (in fact we were one of I think what 4 or 5 teams as of 2 years ago to be ranked in the top 10 in the last I forget how many seasons...someone can find that stat for me).
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,333
|
Post by daveg023 on Mar 22, 2015 15:03:56 GMT -5
So I hate to be negative, but if we all agree that these are the expectations, isn't it safe to say we have not met these targets for the last 8 years? Isn't it fair that our coach should take some blame for this? I'm confused by this statement. All of the "expectations" you've laid out in the initial post have been met the last 8 years other than the sweet 16's. That is what makes it all the more frustrating. Our tourney results haven't met those expectations, but we've been there and consistently been ranked (in fact we were one of I think what 4 or 5 teams as of 2 years ago to be ranked in the top 10 in the last I forget how many seasons...someone can find that stat for me). No I agree we are meeting the other expectations outside of NCAA tournament success. The BET and regular season titles haven't been as plentiful... though I realize that 6 of those 8 years we were playing in a historically tough Big East. That metric will have to be judged going forward.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,736
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 22, 2015 15:12:57 GMT -5
What does "Expectations" mean here?
Are they goals for the program? Or the bare minimum a coach needs to be retained? To many people, it seems like those two things are equal. They are not in my mind.
In terms of expectations, I'd take Hoyaloya's list but actually up the tournament success -- we should be making the Sweet Sixteen more often or pepper in a deeper run. And there's no doubt the staff has not met overall tournament expectations -- though I think it is ridiculous to ignore 2006 and 2007.
It's also ridiculous to not look in context. I posted earlier our average Pomeroy rank over the years was 9th -- it might be a bit lower -- but there's a good chance that the Georgetown program has been about 10th best over the 11 year period. Yeah, we all want better tournament success, but how can you be upset with 10th?
We don't have the 10th best facilities, or program history. We don't have the 10th easiest academic standards, or 10th hottest women. We might have the 10th best NBA production, but some of that is under this staff (who continually sees their players listed by NBA GMS as "most prepared"). We're in a Top 6 conference, so that's nice. But we're not UNC, Duke, Kentucky or Arizona. Aside from the coaching staff, we're not UCLA or Indiana. And III isn't Izzo or Pitino. But after that -- he's right there, in that group.
How can anyone honestly be disappointed in the overall performance?
This is where I go back to the start of my post -- expectations for me is a range. Minimum expectations -- as in I would consider firing the staff -- are well below current performance. Maximum expectations -- reaching into goals, is something closer to winning the conference 1/3rd to half the time, consistent Sweet Sixteens and deep runs every few years.
But they aren't the same.
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,333
|
Post by daveg023 on Mar 22, 2015 15:22:24 GMT -5
What does "Expectations" mean here? Are they goals for the program? Or the bare minimum a coach needs to be retained? To many people, it seems like those two things are equal. They are not in my mind. In terms of expectations, I'd take Hoyaloya's list but actually up the tournament success -- we should be making the Sweet Sixteen more often or pepper in a deeper run. And there's no doubt the staff has not met overall tournament expectations -- though I think it is ridiculous to ignore 2006 and 2007. It's also ridiculous to not look in context. I posted earlier our average Pomeroy rank over the years was 9th -- it might be a bit lower -- but there's a good chance that the Georgetown program has been about 10th best over the 11 year period. Yeah, we all want better tournament success, but how can you be upset with 10th? We don't have the 10th best facilities, or program history. We don't have the 10th easiest academic standards, or 10th hottest women. We might have the 10th best NBA production, but some of that is under this staff (who continually sees their players listed by NBA GMS as "most prepared"). We're in a Top 6 conference, so that's nice. But we're not UNC, Duke, Kentucky or Arizona. Aside from the coaching staff, we're not UCLA or Indiana. And III isn't Izzo or Pitino. But after that -- he's right there, in that group. How can anyone honestly be disappointed in the overall performance? This is where I go back to the start of my post -- expectations for me is a range. Minimum expectations -- as in I would consider firing the staff -- are well below current performance. Maximum expectations -- reaching into goals, is something closer to winning the conference 1/3rd to half the time, consistent Sweet Sixteens and deep runs every few years. But they aren't the same. Excellent post. I'm not advocating for firing JT III, as I am very happy with the program and it's current trajectory. I was merely trying to gauge others thoughts about what they expect, and in turn show that we are pretty close to meeting most rational fans expectations during the JT III era. Bottom line as others have pointed out, this is supposed to be a source of enjoyment and pleasure. And so long as Georgetown remains relevant and competitive in the conference and nationally, while running a reputable program, that's well worth my allegiance...
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,736
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 22, 2015 15:32:49 GMT -5
I didn't think you were, I'm just curious what you mean by expectations.
Every year I have objectives at work. Some I exceed; some I don't. I don't meet every expectation on the list, but overall, I do so/exceed. There's not a question that I'm going to get fired even if I'm not always getting the highest bonus or promoted (probably because I spend too much time on here).
So when you are asking this question, are you looking for those types of expectations -- ones in which it is possible to not meet one of them but overall meet or exceed expectations? Or are you asking for the bare minimum -- ones in which the coach should be on the hot seat/terminated? Because my answer differs.
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,333
|
Post by daveg023 on Mar 22, 2015 15:39:36 GMT -5
I see. Well I guess originally my intention was more of the latter. What is the bare minimum expected for the program? What level of acheivement must the coaching staff be judged on?
That being said, I was also gauging the perceived upside as well, to see others' thoughts on what the ceiling of the program looks like. Not that this is what we expect every year, and failure to do so means the coach has done a bad job, but more what is our best case scenario in the current era.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,736
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 22, 2015 15:56:59 GMT -5
I see. Well I guess originally my intention was more of the latter. What is the bare minimum expected for the program? What level of acheivement must the coaching staff be judged on? That being said, I was also gauging the perceived upside as well, to see others' thoughts on what the ceiling of the program looks like. Not that this is what we expect every year, and failure to do so means the coach has done a bad job, but more what is our best case scenario in the current era. Cool. Thanks. My bare minimum would never just be one thing, but this is a good approximation: * No Scandals. I think this encompasses the first few points by Hoyaloya. Bring value to Georgetown, be classy, graduate and educate the players, etc. (CHECK) * Get to the tourney roughly 70% of the time over large spans of time. Don't miss the tourney three years in a row. (CHECK) * Be a Top 25 program/Top 3 (New) BE Program over large spans of time. Don't have three bad years in a row. (CHECK) * Demonstrate the ability to change and learn based on changes in the game, personnel or just getting better. (CHECK) * Once every roughly 4 years, have a team that could be considered Top 10. (CHECK) I would not have tournament success on my bare minimum. There's just too many factors to be useful in evaluation. I just really believe it is something that's been a combination of factors (some internal, some external) that has been exacerbated by small sample sizes.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,736
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Mar 22, 2015 15:59:03 GMT -5
In terms of stretch targets:
* No scandals. * Go to the tourney 90%; be Top 25 90% of the time * Finish Top 3 in BE 90% and win at least 1/3rd of the time * Be Top 10 2 of 5 years, National Title contender 1 in 5. * Demonstrate the ability to change and learn based on changes in the game, personnel or just getting better.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Mar 22, 2015 16:20:48 GMT -5
In terms of stretch targets: * No scandals. * Go to the tourney 90%; be Top 25 90% of the time * Finish Top 3 in BE 90% and win at least 1/3rd of the time * Be Top 10 2 of 5 years, National Title contender 1 in 5. * Demonstrate the ability to change and learn based on changes in the game, personnel or just getting better. I can't believe we're having this discussion for two pages and no one has made the "goals" and "expectations" Joe Lang quote a focus. (If anything, this discussion shows that Lang's quote was quite sensible in theory, if wrongheaded for an AD to attempt to say, and perhaps incorrect substantively in terms of realistic expectations). Anyway, my minimal expectation in every year is to be engaged throughout the regular season. That is, I want to think we are realistically in line for at least an NCAA bid every time we take the court. If I don't think that, I'm just not as interested in the outcome. Last year just barely met that standard. Otherwise, I generally agree with SF's metrics.
|
|