|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 5, 2017 7:47:13 GMT -5
Frazier isn't waffling around. He's telling you that he needs to see how the season plays out before telling you what his opinion is regarding the program's direction. In other words, he wants to make an informed decision. I realize that your sole agenda is to push for a coaching change (which is clear from your posts) and you do it after every single loss. Don't worry, we all know that. There's the broken record. If I had the time to pull up the posts from last year when we ended I'd find the posts about how we need to make the tournament this year or else it has to be changed. But again, we'll act like this is a season can be saved and if not, it's some isolated instance. What's the motive for this as I find you and FF not rational if you went to this school and care about winning. How dare you question my loyalty. I went to this school, and have been following this program, long before you. I care very much about the program - but I have developed enough perspective that I don't scream for change after every loss, mock and belittle anyone who doesn't, but instead prefer to wait until a season ends before making my own assessment of whether and what changes are needed.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 5, 2017 7:51:38 GMT -5
I think JT3 should look at what Coach K did last night when he moved Grayson (watch your feet) Allen to the PG and do the same with Peak at least for segments in the game going with a Peak, Pryor, Johnson, and Agau/Derrickson/Govan/Hayes combination. This could work in JT3's offense that doesn't value the modern PG skill set. How Mourning doesn't get a look is another question? I think III should look at what K did and take a four MONTH sabbatical... Fixed it for you 'vadi.
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Jan 5, 2017 8:05:32 GMT -5
The lack of support and apologizing tonight is deafening. Can't wait for those snipers to come back on tomorrow with same nonsense about the next game and how we can right this through some crazy win streak against teams we can('t) beat. If this isn't Deja Vu I don't know what is. What the heck is there to apologize for? The team lost. It was not for lack of effort, preparation, or strategy...Providence just outplayed us down the stretch. Disappointing, but no huge shock...time to move on to Butler and support the team in its next game.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,777
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jan 5, 2017 8:28:22 GMT -5
Allonzo Trier was in the area for one year at Montrose. He wasn't close to "local". Fair point.
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,910
|
Post by Filo on Jan 5, 2017 8:30:11 GMT -5
Look, Eagle, we get it, you think a coaching change has long been overdue. You are not the only one. Many agree. Even many who didn't initially agree are coming around to that conclusion. However, you are continuing to harp on the same points over and over and, honestly, you are making this site unreadable. I don't see how your personal mission to hijack this site is going to have any effect on the administration's decisions regarding the future of the program, so please knock it off. This request has nothing to do with disagreement with your position, defense of the status quo, or anything like that.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Jan 5, 2017 8:37:05 GMT -5
Awfully hard to be competitive when you get nothing out if your 1's and your 5's. You need massive production from the other spots every night, or you get loss after loss. Not sure there is anything we can do to change it. Defensively, there isn't anything we can do to change it. Offensively, PC actually took away our 5s by doubling aggressively in the post at all times. So, it wasn't really their fault on that end, and they actually passed out of the doubles reasonably well. We just got no production from anyone except Marcus (and Agau on rebounds). This team doesn't need both of our scorers to be on to be successful, but one of them has to be. Unlike the PGs, both take so many shots that if they're missing, we have a lot of empty possessions. In other words, if we aren't getting massive production from the 1s or 5s (a combined 4-12 in this one), that isn't necessarily crippling, because they at least aren't ending possessions. But when P and P go 8-30, well, even with a big game from Marcus, we can't make up for that. The shame of it is that if we had played like we did against X in either of the other two BE games, we probably win both. I don't have great answers defensively. We played reasonably well defensively to start the game. I thought the zone (and it started as a 3-2 and then we played a lot of 2-3 late) was reasonably effective, but of course, it gives up rebounds, and that hurt us. We're now 8-7 with four of those seven losses within two possessions. That's not an apology or an excuse -- we need to win (frankly, we needed to win yesterday). But it is a simple fact and an indication that if we shore things up just a bit on either end, we have the ability to win some ballgames. Unfortunately, this team (and the larger program) has now lost all room for further error.
|
|
bigskyhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,095
|
Post by bigskyhoya on Jan 5, 2017 8:40:31 GMT -5
Is there ANYONE on this Board who thinks there would not have been a coaching change already if our coach's last name was not Thompson?
During the Esherick years, Hoya fans came to the conclusion, long before the administration, that we needed a change. At the risk of incurring the wrath of some loyalists on this Board, I will admit to hoping that the Hoyas truly imploded back then so that there would be no choice but to replace Esherick. Luckily for the Hoyas that happened and we got our new coach.
I am afraid we are in the same boat now. If the Hoyas improve from abysmal to mediocre with a few decent wins, I fear that we will be stuck with this Coach unless and until we implode. Middle of the pack (and, more likely, much worse) is just not good enough. So, my first choice is that we win out. And my second is that we lose enough to force the administration's hand.
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Jan 5, 2017 8:55:46 GMT -5
Is there ANYONE on this Board who thinks there would not have been a coaching change already if our coach's last name was not Thompson? During the Esherick years, Hoya fans came to the conclusion, long before the administration, that we needed a change. At the risk of incurring the wrath of some loyalists on this Board, I will admit to hoping that the Hoyas truly imploded back then so that there would be no choice but to replace Esherick. Luckily for the Hoyas that happened and we got our new coach. I am afraid we are in the same boat now. If the Hoyas improve from abysmal to mediocre with a few decent wins, I fear that we will be stuck with this Coach unless and until we implode. Middle of the pack (and, more likely, much worse) is just not good enough. So, my first choice is that we win out. And my second is that we lose enough to force the administration's hand. Me, for one. I think III has EARNED massive job security. As I have said many times before- he ought to have through the end of the 2020 season- meaning if the rest of the years between now and then look like 2016 and onward, perhaps the administration should consider a change at that point. Until then, to me, he has earned PLENTY of rope and patience from the school, which ought to be very pleased to have him.
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Jan 5, 2017 9:12:06 GMT -5
Is there ANYONE on this Board who thinks there would not have been a coaching change already if our coach's last name was not Thompson? During the Esherick years, Hoya fans came to the conclusion, long before the administration, that we needed a change. At the risk of incurring the wrath of some loyalists on this Board, I will admit to hoping that the Hoyas truly imploded back then so that there would be no choice but to replace Esherick. Luckily for the Hoyas that happened and we got our new coach. I am afraid we are in the same boat now. If the Hoyas improve from abysmal to mediocre with a few decent wins, I fear that we will be stuck with this Coach unless and until we implode. Middle of the pack (and, more likely, much worse) is just not good enough. So, my first choice is that we win out. And my second is that we lose enough to force the administration's hand. Me, for one. I think III has EARNED massive job security. As I have said many times before- he ought to have through the end of the 2020 season- meaning if the rest of the years between now and then look like 2016 and onward, perhaps the administration should consider a change at that point. Until then, to me, he has earned PLENTY of rope and patience from the school, which ought to be very pleased to have him. I would disagree. I think that the end of the rope has been reached. He didn't win a championship, he got us to the final four. As a program, we can and should be consistently better. Look at the top of the BE and it is dominated by the newcomers from the A-10, Missouri Valley & Horizon leagues. The only reasonable argument is we just got the facilities and that will impact recruiting but I am not so sure. The style of play was hyped as changing and frankly we are running the same princeton sets against man. There is no real innovation. Tough losses will happen and I am fine with those. Upsets will happen and I am fine with those. The issue has been way too many upsets consistently, way too many losses in conference consistently, and underperforming relative to recruiting expectations pretty consistently. Chris Wright was a McD player surrounded with other high profile recruits and when he was running the show, JTIII didn't get far. I just don't see how a guy who is a top 40 recruit is somehow the answer to this whole mess.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,777
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jan 5, 2017 9:17:06 GMT -5
Is there ANYONE on this Board who thinks there would not have been a coaching change already if our coach's last name was not Thompson? Coaching changes based on performance are not the norm at Georgetown without some incident of scandal or malfeasance. It's why Pete Wilk has been head baseball coach for 18 years, without a single winning season. In fact, Georgetown hasn't had a winning season since 1986. It's why Kevin Warne, with the worst record in 30 years of men's lacrosse, is still coaching despite no NCAA bids for men's lacrosse in 10 years. It's why Kevin Kelly (eight years, 24-63) might still be at Georgetown were it not for Pete Lembo offering him $150K to coach at Ball State. For those who say, "well, it's not basketball", that's the point. Georgetown prides itself institutionally on not being a way point for coaches.
|
|
AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,125
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Jan 5, 2017 9:22:06 GMT -5
DFW you are correct. How can this change? A number of alumni have expressed to me they are withholding substantial contributions to the University and making it known this is part of the reason. I am not sure this is the best way to approach the issue but clearly, given the history you discuss, something needs to be done.
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Jan 5, 2017 9:25:31 GMT -5
Is there ANYONE on this Board who thinks there would not have been a coaching change already if our coach's last name was not Thompson? Coaching changes based on performance are not the norm at Georgetown without some incident of scandal or malfeasance. It's why Pete Wilk has been head baseball coach for 18 years, without a single winning season. In fact, Georgetown hasn't had a winning season since 1986. It's why Kevin Warne, with the worst record in 30 years of men's lacrosse, is still coaching despite no NCAA bids for men's lacrosse in 10 years. It's why Kevin Kelly might still be at Georgetown were it not for Pete Lembo offering him $150K to coach at Ball State. For those who say, "well, it's not basketball", that's the point. Georgetown prides itself institutionally on not being a way point for coaches. And Georgetown is very wise in so doing.
|
|
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 Jan 5, 2017 9:41:27 GMT -5
Is there ANYONE on this Board who thinks there would not have been a coaching change already if our coach's last name was not Thompson? During the Esherick years, Hoya fans came to the conclusion, long before the administration, that we needed a change. At the risk of incurring the wrath of some loyalists on this Board, I will admit to hoping that the Hoyas truly imploded back then so that there would be no choice but to replace Esherick. Luckily for the Hoyas that happened and we got our new coach. I am afraid we are in the same boat now. If the Hoyas improve from abysmal to mediocre with a few decent wins, I fear that we will be stuck with this Coach unless and until we implode. Middle of the pack (and, more likely, much worse) is just not good enough. So, my first choice is that we win out. And my second is that we lose enough to force the administration's hand. Me, for one. I think III has EARNED massive job security. As I have said many times before- he ought to have through the end of the 2020 season- meaning if the rest of the years between now and then look like 2016 and onward, perhaps the administration should consider a change at that point. Until then, to me, he has earned PLENTY of rope and patience from the school, which ought to be very pleased to have him. At current performance level, you are advocating or stating that there should be 6 straight seasons of no NCAA bids before considering change. Is this accurate?
|
|
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 Jan 5, 2017 9:45:40 GMT -5
Is there ANYONE on this Board who thinks there would not have been a coaching change already if our coach's last name was not Thompson? Coaching changes based on performance are not the norm at Georgetown without some incident of scandal or malfeasance. It's why Pete Wilk has been head baseball coach for 18 years, without a single winning season. In fact, Georgetown hasn't had a winning season since 1986. It's why Kevin Warne, with the worst record in 30 years of men's lacrosse, is still coaching despite no NCAA bids for men's lacrosse in 10 years. It's why Kevin Kelly might still be at Georgetown were it not for Pete Lembo offering him $150K to coach at Ball State. For those who say, " well, it's not basketball", that's the point. Georgetown prides itself institutionally on not being a way point for coaches. If winning is not a real priority then why spend the money on a new basketball facility? It comes off as a dog and pony show when in actuality it does not matter how the coach performs; the coach stays put no matter the results.
|
|
|
Post by bankshot53 on Jan 5, 2017 9:45:49 GMT -5
Coaching changes based on performance are not the norm at Georgetown without some incident of scandal or malfeasance. It's why Pete Wilk has been head baseball coach for 18 years, without a single winning season. In fact, Georgetown hasn't had a winning season since 1986. It's why Kevin Warne, with the worst record in 30 years of men's lacrosse, is still coaching despite no NCAA bids for men's lacrosse in 10 years. It's why Kevin Kelly might still be at Georgetown were it not for Pete Lembo offering him $150K to coach at Ball State. For those who say, "well, it's not basketball", that's the point. Georgetown prides itself institutionally on not being a way point for coaches. And Georgetown is very wise is so doing.
|
|
|
Post by bankshot53 on Jan 5, 2017 9:46:37 GMT -5
And Georgetown is very wise is so doing.
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Jan 5, 2017 9:55:14 GMT -5
Me, for one. I think III has EARNED massive job security. As I have said many times before- he ought to have through the end of the 2020 season- meaning if the rest of the years between now and then look like 2016 and onward, perhaps the administration should consider a change at that point. Until then, to me, he has earned PLENTY of rope and patience from the school, which ought to be very pleased to have him. At current performance level, you are advocating or stating that there should be 6 straight seasons of no NCAA bids before considering change. Is this accurate? It would be five by my count, but I doubt that ever happens as I have lots of confidence in the staff and program.
|
|
|
Post by aleutianhoya on Jan 5, 2017 9:59:59 GMT -5
Is there ANYONE on this Board who thinks there would not have been a coaching change already if our coach's last name was not Thompson? Coaching changes based on performance are not the norm at Georgetown without some incident of scandal or malfeasance. It's why Pete Wilk has been head baseball coach for 18 years, without a single winning season. In fact, Georgetown hasn't had a winning season since 1986. It's why Kevin Warne, with the worst record in 30 years of men's lacrosse, is still coaching despite no NCAA bids for men's lacrosse in 10 years. It's why Kevin Kelly might still be at Georgetown were it not for Pete Lembo offering him $150K to coach at Ball State. For those who say, "well, it's not basketball", that's the point. Georgetown prides itself institutionally on not being a way point for coaches. Except that the school always (at least in the modern era) treated basketball differently from all other sports. From funding to autonomy to travel to [you name it], men's basketball is different from every other sport. I agree that in other sports, particularly those that aren't fully funded, winning is only one part of the evaluation process. And aside from malfeasance, change is unusual. For sure, that carries over to basketball in the sense that winning and losing is only part of the evaluation process. But I don't think it's accurate to say it's the same as other sports. Winning and losing is a much bigger part of the evaluation process than in other sports. In short, even if Georgetown provides its men's basketball coach with more rope than would most other schools, it doesn't provide as long a rope as it does to coaches in its other sports. The school cares about perception (from the public; from alumni) at least somewhat. And it cares a good deal -- necessarily -- about finances. If donations and attendance dry up, as they did at the close of the Esherick era, the school will make a move out of necessity. We can be nearly certain III will never embarrass the school like Craig did, so he'll never have that strike against him, but I don't think that is a precondition. Despite Eagle's badgering, the only way to reasonably analyze this is at the end of the season. If the season is a debacle -- a losing record, etc. -- well, I think there is a decent chance the school makes a move or makes it clear that next year is make or break.
|
|
|
Post by bankshot53 on Jan 5, 2017 10:04:21 GMT -5
Entrenchment at Georgetown is not limited to the Athletic Department. In terms of basketball, "The Answer" is a different approach to coaching and player retention. In other words, new blood. Someone like King Rice, the current Monmouth coach, would be a fit. He's enjoyed nothing but success to date and his players stay for the duration. But maybe it's too scary a move for the Hoya administration?
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Jan 5, 2017 10:06:03 GMT -5
Look, Eagle, we get it, you think a coaching change has long been overdue. You are not the only one. Many agree. Even many who didn't initially agree are coming around to that conclusion. However, you are continuing to harp on the same points over and over and, honestly, you are making this site unreadable. I don't see how your personal mission to hijack this site is going to have any effect on the administration's decisions regarding the future of the program, so please knock it off. This request has nothing to do with disagreement with your position, defense of the status quo, or anything like that. Amen.
|
|