tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,319
|
Post by tashoya on Sept 18, 2016 16:35:35 GMT -5
Good point, DFW, but there is a chicken-egg question inherent in your post. Are the Hoyas choosing to go after projects because that is who they really want, or are they going that route because a lot of local kids are not interested? I think it is a bit of both... I am all for taking projects, by the way, but there is no question that involves lots of risk. Also, the world has gotten much smaller in the last 30 years. The competition wasn't as fierce for local kids and it was easier to build a stronger relationship with kids in your own backyard than schools from out of the area could hope to build. The competition is now well beyond regional. I'm sure that most schools get fewer local kids than they did in the past but also have a far greater number of kids on their radar than 20 years ago. Recruiting is beyond a full time job at this point. Reputation means more than it ever has in order to get kids pursuing the school as opposed to the school having to pursue each kid.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Sept 19, 2016 0:19:08 GMT -5
When we discuss the health of Georgetown recruiting shouldn't we be separating the JUCO/5thyear/transfer pool from the high school pool. No. Maybe 5+ years ago, but not anymore. Almost all the top programs are looking at grad transfers and "regular" transfers now (JUCO not as much I'd say).
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,351
|
Post by calhoya on Sept 19, 2016 7:20:01 GMT -5
Good point, DFW, but there is a chicken-egg question inherent in your post. Are the Hoyas choosing to go after projects because that is who they really want, or are they going that route because a lot of local kids are not interested? I think it is a bit of both... I am all for taking projects, by the way, but there is no question that involves lots of risk. Also, the world has gotten much smaller in the last 30 years. The competition wasn't as fierce for local kids and it was easier to build a stronger relationship with kids in your own backyard than schools from out of the area could hope to build. The competition is now well beyond regional. I'm sure that most schools get fewer local kids than they did in the past but also have a far greater number of kids on their radar than 20 years ago. Recruiting is beyond a full time job at this point. Reputation means more than it ever has in order to get kids pursuing the school as opposed to the school having to pursue each kid. Agree with this. With the media contracts that most major conferences now have, a kid does not need to be close for his family/friends to watch almost every game. This allows schools outside of the DMV to come in and poach kids they could not have gotten in the past. Also, the media has played a significant role in re-branding the Hoya program under JT III. Rightly or wrongly, the Princeton label is still used to describe the Hoya offense. This offense (which I realize has been modified by JT III in recent years) has become a negative recruiting tool for opposing coaches. If JT III is going to change to a different offense as indicated often lately, it needs to be highly publicized and sold to the media. Unfortunately in a world dominated by AAU and club ball, it is all about image and perception these days, more so than reality.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,852
|
Post by EtomicB on Sept 19, 2016 8:17:49 GMT -5
a) Georgetown used to recruit well b) Georgetown doesn't recruit well any more and I'm worried c) But if we get one Top 100 recruit we're currently interested in, I'm changing my mind. a) Georgetown used to recruit LOCALLY well b) Georgetown doesn't recruit LOCALLY well any more Every great Georgetown team in the Big East era has, at its core, a local/regional base: the kids that knew each other. played each other and most importantly, the kind of kids the coaches knew up close, not in a AAU quadruple-header or a video. Not all were stars but they formed a core to build on. 1980 had seven: the Duren brothers, Shelton. Eric Smith, Hancock, Bullis, Spriggs 1982 had eight: Jones, the three Smiths (Eric, Gene, Vadi), Martin, Hancock, Blue, Spriggs 1984 had eight: Gene Smith, Martin, Jackson, Wingate, Williams, Graham, Dairsow, Dalton 1987 had five: Winston, Charles Smith, Tillmon, Williams, Jefferson 1989 had six: Winston, Charles Smith, Tillmon, Thompson, Jefferson, Turner 2007 had five: Summers, Crawford, Green, Ewing, Hibbert 2016-17 has two: Tre Campbell and Marcus Derrickson. The story of Georgetown's flagging brand is in its "reaches": a high schooler in Stephen Domingo, a baffling choice in Brandon Bolden, even a Moses Ayegba. (I'd even consider that Josh Smith, given his reputation at UCLA, was a reach.) Because over the last three years, the DC/Baltimore area has produced top 100 recruits in Melo Trimble, Dion Wiley, Allonzo Trier, Franklin Howard, Marcus Derickson, Bryant Crawford, Markelle Fultz, V.J. King, and Anthony Cowan. What do they all have in common? All but one are playing somewhere other than Georgetown. It doesn't make a difference to me where kids come from, the only thing that matters are.. 1 - Do they fit what the coach likes to do? 2 - Can they play? Players like Domingo, Bolden, Moses & even Josh shouldn't be labeled as reaches, imo they were misses.. Hayes was a reach.. When you take kids as Jr's in HS(Domingo & Bolden) to me that's a terrible job at evaluating talent/upside.. Same goes for Moses(injuries did hold him back) & Josh imo.. Unfortunately Gtown had 2 misses & a reach in the 2012 class.. Missing out on Wiley or Howard or Bryant isn't the bad part, it's not recruiting kids like Cheatham & Carter from Marquette harder after those other kids went elsewhere is the bad part imo.. This isn't hindsight either, I said it at the time JT3 was still chasing Rabb when he already had verbals from Marcus, Jessie & Noah Dickerson..
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Sept 19, 2016 8:30:47 GMT -5
The day the Hoyas stop chasing the Rabbs of the world is the day they accept somehow being a second-tier program, and I hope that day is NEVER. They can and should go after the top kids. Get knocked down and get right back up again. I am proud that III continues to fight these battles and hope that does not change.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,852
|
Post by EtomicB on Sept 19, 2016 8:50:23 GMT -5
The day the Hoyas stop chasing the Rabbs of the world is the day they accept somehow being a second-tier program, and I hope that day is NEVER. They can and should go after the top kids. Get knocked down and get right back up again. I am proud that III continues to fight these battles and hope that does not change. But he already had 2 highly regarded PF's and a top center in the fold, that's not enough for one class? Roster balance doesn't matter to you?
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Sept 19, 2016 9:05:44 GMT -5
Not really. Recruiting the best players available should be the focus IMHO.
Rabb was your example, so that is who I mentioned, but the concept applies to any recruit. The staff should focus on the players who they feel can take the team to the next level and who are at least considering Georgetown seriously. I do believe that Rabb considered the Hoyas for a while, so he fits the bill for me, and I have no regrets about his recruitment.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,852
|
Post by EtomicB on Sept 19, 2016 9:27:45 GMT -5
Not really. Recruiting the best players available should be the focus IMHO. Rabb was your example, so that is who I mentioned, but the concept applies to any recruit. The staff should focus on the players who they feel can take the team to the next level and who are at least considering Georgetown seriously. I do believe that Rabb considered the Hoyas for a while, so he fits the bill for me, and I have no regrets about his recruitment. So you think if the best players available in a class are forwards then that's who the staff should recruit regardless of who they currently have on their roster? I mentioned Rabb because he's in the same class as the kids(Bryant, Howard, Wiley) DFW brought up as local recruiting misses in his post..
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Sept 19, 2016 9:38:01 GMT -5
Yes- I will gladly take an "unbalanced" class full of stud players.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2016 9:49:03 GMT -5
Yes- I will gladly take an "unbalanced" class full of stud players. OK. But you're not getting that. The key is the "... at the expense of the recruitment of other talented kids in the 50-150 range that would could/should be getting." part. I don't think there's any definitive way to determine whether that's currently happening and to what extent. But for the sake of argument here -- say it is. Say it's happening at the rate of: we GET 1 top 5-10 kid every dozen years (like Monroe) vs. LOSE 1 top 75-125 kid every year. Do you make that trade-off?
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Sept 19, 2016 9:57:03 GMT -5
Yes, in a heartbeat.
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Sept 19, 2016 9:57:27 GMT -5
Although I do NOT believe that is what is happening at all.
|
|
|
Post by eastcoastteddy58 on Sept 19, 2016 9:59:36 GMT -5
We often see fault in JT3 for not grabbing the local recruits but what I see far to often are personalty issue within the recruits themselves that conflict with being a Hoya. Georgetown has always tried to produce men not thugs! Their have been some local recruits that have character issues going forward, past and present.
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Sept 19, 2016 10:16:11 GMT -5
Right- and that goes along with recruiting the guys the staff truly wants.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Sept 19, 2016 12:22:35 GMT -5
Also, the media has played a significant role in re-branding the Hoya program under JT III. Rightly or wrongly, the Princeton label is still used to describe the Hoya offense. This offense (which I realize has been modified by JT III in recent years) has become a negative recruiting tool for opposing coaches. If JT III is going to change to a different offense as indicated often lately, it needs to be highly publicized and sold to the media. Unfortunately in a world dominated by AAU and club ball, it is all about image and perception these days, more so than reality. I totally agree. I've said elsewhere on here that if JT3 is serious about playing differently (and even if not, to some extent) he should rebrand the offense and tell the media about it every chance he gets - come up with a catchy name for it and let the media repeat it ad nauseum during our games. Let the players talk about it too, if warranted. We haven't played anything like a true Princeton offense in years, but the perception is still out there which is why JT3 should make efforts to change that perception.
|
|
|
Post by thejerseytornado on Sept 19, 2016 14:43:48 GMT -5
totally agree. I've said elsewhere on here that if JT3 is serious about playing differently (and even if not, to some extent) he should rebrand the offense and tell the media about it every chance he gets - come up with a catchy name for it and let the media repeat it ad nauseum during our games. Let the players talk about it too, if warranted. We haven't played anything like a true Princeton offense in years, but the perception is still out there which is why JT3 should make efforts to change that perception. It's almost like JT3's been doing that since 2007 (you can find quotes from articles from as far back as then with him saying that), but sometimes a coach can't change the media's dumb-ass coverage. especially media that has no investment in the big east and dominates coverage. clever name or not, it only catches after winning, not before. No one knew about Shaka Smart and HAVOC until it made a masterful run in the tourney. The name won't change until the team wins something again. When we were winning, it wasn't a problem to be princeton-esque for recruiting/perception. Calipari's UK and the reaction to that really changed the game at an unfortunate time for us.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Sept 19, 2016 17:13:13 GMT -5
It's almost like JT3's been doing that since 2007 (you can find quotes from articles from as far back as then with him saying that), but sometimes a coach can't change the media's dumb-ass coverage. especially media that has no investment in the big east and dominates coverage. clever name or not, it only catches after winning, not before. No one knew about Shaka Smart and HAVOC until it made a masterful run in the tourney. The name won't change until the team wins something again. When we were winning, it wasn't a problem to be princeton-esque for recruiting/perception. Calipari's UK and the reaction to that really changed the game at an unfortunate time for us. After 2007, there was really no reason to worry about branding. We had just made a Final Four, our recruiting was strong, and we had a good "story" (great program that had fallen but was now rising on the back of the son of a former legendary coach). Yes, there was talk about the "Princetown" and all that. But, there's never been a concerted effort to change perception, which would include: (1) Very vocally stating that you are changing philosophy. Make it a talking point of each and every broadcast. Broadcasters need material; give it to them. (2) Give it a snappy name to make it more catchy. Princetown isn't it. That still has the Princeton connotation. Give it a new name that sounds appealing and attractive. (3) Of course, winning matters. If we have a "new" system, and we win, it will get attention. Of course winning is important to any rebranding. Nobody cares about you if you lose. JT3 has definitely talked about playing faster, recruiting more athletic players, etc. And, that's fine, but not what I have in mind.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,259
|
Post by prhoya on Sept 19, 2016 17:50:57 GMT -5
(1) Very vocally stating that you are changing philosophy. Make it a talking point of each and every broadcast. Broadcasters need material; give it to them. Wouldn't that mean admitting that he's failed or that it took him a stubborn 10 years to realize that something was not working (and yet he kept his job)? I think he will continue to be subtle about it (like he's done so far while tweaking the PrinceTown) and let the play speak for itself. Nothing about Pryor, Peak (without the reins) and Mulmore says Princeton.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,852
|
Post by EtomicB on Sept 19, 2016 20:30:57 GMT -5
Also, the media has played a significant role in re-branding the Hoya program under JT III. Rightly or wrongly, the Princeton label is still used to describe the Hoya offense. This offense (which I realize has been modified by JT III in recent years) has become a negative recruiting tool for opposing coaches. If JT III is going to change to a different offense as indicated often lately, it needs to be highly publicized and sold to the media. Unfortunately in a world dominated by AAU and club ball, it is all about image and perception these days, more so than reality. I totally agree. I've said elsewhere on here that if JT3 is serious about playing differently (and even if not, to some extent) he should rebrand the offense and tell the media about it every chance he gets - come up with a catchy name for it and let the media repeat it ad nauseum during our games. Let the players talk about it too, if warranted. We haven't played anything like a true Princeton offense in years, but the perception is still out there which is why JT3 should make efforts to change that perception. Wouldn't the best way to change the perception of the offense/Gtown style of play is to actually change the offense/style of play? The main issues with the PrinceTown offense in the recent past has been more roster & execution related imo.. Remember when JT3's early teams played similar to this..
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Sept 20, 2016 7:02:49 GMT -5
(1) Very vocally stating that you are changing philosophy. Make it a talking point of each and every broadcast. Broadcasters need material; give it to them. Wouldn't that mean admitting that he's failed or that it took him a stubborn 10 years to realize that something was not working (and yet he kept his job)? I think he will continue to be subtle about it (like he's done so far while tweaking the PrinceTown) and let the play speak for itself. Nothing about Pryor, Peak (without the reins) and Mulmore says Princeton. He should not "admit" that, because it is completely false hogwash. There is nothing to apologize for in any respect. If he has chosen to modify the offense, that is fine- but he should not approach it as something to tread carefully around. Coaches change systems at times. That is not an indictment of the old system.
|
|