|
Post by aleutianhoya on Jan 5, 2017 10:07:51 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? He's had one good year! One! And he didn't even make the NCAAT that year. This is his sixth year as a head coach. I give him (and all coaches) a pass their first few years, but he had losing records in all three. He had a pretty good year two years ago, and a good one last year. But so far this year, he's 2-2 in his league. That's the guy who leads us to the promised land! Of course his players stay for the duration...how many NEC or MAAC players leave early?!?
|
|
IDenj
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,528
|
Post by IDenj on Jan 5, 2017 10:13:57 GMT -5
What's a bigger priority for Georgetown and the AD. A successful national basketball program or keeping the Thompsons happy and an influential component of the program?
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Jan 5, 2017 10:17:49 GMT -5
It's not just the losses, it's the lack of effort and urgency. Our players just don't look motivated and give up rebounds and loose balls.
|
|
|
Post by FHillsNYHoya on Jan 5, 2017 10:19:33 GMT -5
Apologize if this is somewhere in the thread already...the front page links to the JTIII post-game presser, and III is running it solo - no players at the table.
Anyone recall this happening previously under III?
|
|
deacon
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,850
|
Post by deacon on Jan 5, 2017 10:38:19 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. You have to be kidding. Have to be.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 5, 2017 10:44:41 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. 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. Stop playing the fence!!😉
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 5, 2017 10:47:00 GMT -5
Enough said. Have no real opinion than why post? You need to ask yourself that one. By the way - I have a VERY STRONG real opinion about something - but I don't want to force Dan to ban me, so I will keep it to myself.🤐
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,362
|
Post by calhoya on Jan 5, 2017 10:47:50 GMT -5
Final comments on the game last night. The Hoyas lost to a bad team and looked bad in doing so. Although we have plenty of time for the debate about the future of the program and its coach, the immediate problem is making the product on the floor look respectable enough to avoid further damage to the school's image as a basketball program. Depaul entered the death spiral and has only recently begun to get quality recruits to even look at the program. The issue for this coaching staff is that no matter how much playing time is available next year, 4 and 5 star recruits always have options for playing time. Now they also can be assured of getting national television exposure as well at almost every major program in the nation. Even the one and dones are interested in playing for winning programs.
I am assuming that the preseason comments on the players were fluff intended to revive interest in the program or that the coach completely missed on his assessments or his ability to maximize the talents that he described. Whatever the case it is not great for the program or the fans who relied upon the representations.
Last night at times we had 4 kids on the floor who present absolutely no threat to score from anything other than the lane. The two PGs who played may have attempted 2 outside shots between them and missed badly. Neither Hayes nor Agau can or will shoot from the outside. Kaleb remains a mystery, capable of playing defense but apprently not able to create a shot and certainly not a FT shooter. When an opposing coach is looking at a lineup featuring 4 non-scorers and one threat, it does not require genius to figure out the defense. Pryor and Peak were not good but while their judgment was not great at times (LJ returned to old ways of wild drives to the basket) their effort was undeniable. The post position is just a collection of role players right now with Hayes regressing badly on both ends of the court to what he was before last season. No explanation for that from an experienced 5th year player. Maybe more of the Govan and Agau line-up with MD moving to the 3 at times. If you play zone it would be somewhat easier for him to play defense, particularly against a team that cannot shoot well.
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Jan 5, 2017 11:06:46 GMT -5
I would like to see improvement on switching out top against PG's. Provy did it last night to us where Mosely or Mulmore, I forget which, didn't fight through the screen and we ended up with Cartwright against Derrickson. Every team has done this to us and the guard then blows by for a bucket or gets it to the big. The reason this struck me was the switch wasn't even necessary. our guard could have fought through. it is killing us in key situations and there has to be someone on our bench coaching them to fix this.
Also, why the F**K are we jumping on shot fakes or running past shooters to get a hand in the face thus giving up the rebound on misses? I have seen this for four years. If I am coach, if you run at a shooter and jump flying past them, you are out of the game. Run at the shooter, hand up, feet on the ground, and turn and block out.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jan 5, 2017 11:08:47 GMT -5
It's not just the losses, it's the lack of effort and urgency. Our players just don't look motivated and give up rebounds and loose balls. I really thought our guys played with significant effort last night. You could see on rebounds they were really going for it, even more so than in previous games. I think people have a tendency to equate losing with lack of effort. I just don't see a lack of effort. Rather, I see a weak team that's simply not that good. For all the talk of our "talent" what do we have? Fifth Years: - A fifth year graduate transfer who started in JUCO. Pryor. Despite this, he's still a very good player. Arguably our best. - A fifth year project in Hayes, who was unranked and seems to have regressed from last season. Seniors: - Cameron: 75 RSCI composite. He hasn't shown anything resembling a top 75 recruit. Juniors: - An unranked recruit son of a Hall of Famer (Mourning). - An RSCI 62 (though ranked 31 on ESPN) guard/forward in Peak. He's obviously turned out to be a good player. - An unranked guard (Campbell). - An unranked JUCO guard who excelled in JUCO but has not excelled in Division I yet (Mulmore). - An 88 composite big man who tore his ACL (Agau). (Obviously, we had White/Copeland in this class, but they are no longer on the team and thus irrelevant for evaluating the "talent" of the current team.) Sophomores: - Govan: RSCI composite of 42. Unlike a lot of people on HoyaTalk, I am actually still optimistic he'll be a really good player for us. - Derrickson: RSCI composite of 93. Again, I think Derrickson could be really good for us, and was last night. Still, as a recruit he wasn't highly heralded, though his losing weight and getting in shape before college would have likely boosted his ranking a bit. - Kaleb Johnson: Not on the RSCI top 100, though he was (barely) in the ESPN top 100 at one point. Freshman: - An unranked guard (Mosely). So really, for all the people who are constantly touting our "talent," what am I missing? Yes, we have some talented guys and recruits in Pryor, Peak, Govan, and Derrickson, but none of them were five star recruits and none of them were ever expected to be transformational players (like Iverson was, for example). That's why when people say that a Providence team with Dunn and Bentil had less talent than our teams of those years, I question what those people are seeing. We basically have a team with a mediocre level of talent with some underperformers (Cameron). That's why we aren't doing well. And yes, you can fairly blame recruiting on the staff. I am not saying otherwise. But, I think it's also time to stop pretending like we are so stacked with talent, and only if the guys would put in effort, we would be winning all sorts of games. Can we play better? Of course. But ultimately, we aren't all that talented. The only way we are going to win a lot of games is if players like Peak, Pryor, Derrickson, Govan and a few others up their games and get consistent.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,962
|
Post by EtomicB on Jan 5, 2017 11:26:02 GMT -5
It's not just the losses, it's the lack of effort and urgency. Our players just don't look motivated and give up rebounds and loose balls. I really thought our guys played with significant effort last night. You could see on rebounds they were really going for it, even more so than in previous games. I think people have a tendency to equate losing with lack of effort. I just don't see a lack of effort. Rather, I see a weak team that's simply not that good. For all the talk of our "talent" what do we have? Fifth Years: - A fifth year graduate transfer who started in JUCO. Pryor. Despite this, he's still a very good player. Arguably our best. - A fifth year project in Hayes, who was unranked and seems to have regressed from last season. Seniors: - Cameron: 75 RSCI composite. He hasn't shown anything resembling a top 75 recruit. Juniors: - An unranked recruit son of a Hall of Famer (Mourning). - An RSCI 62 (though ranked 31 on ESPN) guard/forward in Peak. He's obviously turned out to be a good player. - An unranked guard (Campbell). - An unranked JUCO guard who excelled in JUCO but has not excelled in Division I yet (Mulmore). - An 88 composite big man who tore his ACL (Agau). (Obviously, we had White/Copeland in this class, but they are no longer on the team and thus irrelevant for evaluating the "talent" of the current team.) Sophomores: - Govan: RSCI composite of 42. Unlike a lot of people on HoyaTalk, I am actually still optimistic he'll be a really good player for us. - Derrickson: RSCI composite of 93. Again, I think Derrickson could be really good for us, and was last night. Still, as a recruit he wasn't highly heralded, though his losing weight and getting in shape before college would have likely boosted his ranking a bit. - Kaleb Johnson: Not on the RSCI top 100, though he was (barely) in the ESPN top 100 at one point. Freshman: - An unranked guard (Mosely). So really, for all the people who are constantly touting our "talent," what am I missing? Yes, we have some talented guys and recruits in Pryor, Peak, Govan, and Derrickson, but none of them were five star recruits and none of them were ever expected to be transformational players (like Iverson was, for example). That's why when people say that a Providence team with Dunn and Bentil had less talent than our teams of those years, I question what those people are seeing. We basically have a team with a mediocre level of talent with some underperformers (Cameron). That's why we aren't doing well. And yes, you can fairly blame recruiting on the staff. I am not saying otherwise. But, I think it's also time to stop pretending like we are so stacked with talent, and only if the guys would put in effort, we would be winning all sorts of games. Can we play better? Of course. But ultimately, we aren't all that talented. The only way we are going to win a lot of games is if players like Peak, Pryor, Derrickson, Govan and a few others up their games and get consistent. Take a look at Butlers roster 2003 or PCs or Seton Halls, you'll find a lot of similarities..
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,777
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jan 5, 2017 11:33:53 GMT -5
What's a bigger priority for Georgetown and the AD. A successful national basketball program or keeping the Thompsons happy and an influential component of the program? Priorities, in order, spoken from the top: "These are the three commitments we ask you to make when you accept the responsibility for this program: You accept the challenge of coaching in a university that places the highest priority on the academic performance of our students. We do not meet our mission if each of these young men do not perform to the best of their abilities in the classroom. You accept the challenge of setting the highest possible moral standards in the execution of our mission. And you accept the challenge of ensuring that our young men are prepared to go out on the court and win basketball games." Jack DeGioia, April 11, 2003
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Jan 5, 2017 11:41:50 GMT -5
What's a bigger priority for Georgetown and the AD. A successful national basketball program or keeping the Thompsons happy and an influential component of the program? Priorities, in order, spoken from the top: "These are the three commitments we ask you to make when you accept the responsibility for this program: You accept the challenge of coaching in a university that places the highest priority on the academic performance of our students. We do not meet our mission if each of these young men do not perform to the best of their abilities in the classroom. You accept the challenge of setting the highest possible moral standards in the execution of our mission. And you accept the challenge of ensuring that our young men are prepared to go out on the court and win basketball games." Jack DeGioia, April 11, 2003 Reminds me of a Meatloaf song...
|
|
AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,125
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Jan 5, 2017 12:04:53 GMT -5
We basically have a team with a mediocre level of talent with some underperformers (Cameron). That's why we aren't doing well. - EtomicB
Whose responsibility is that? I thought the head coach is the head recruiter.
|
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,775
|
Post by njhoya78 on Jan 5, 2017 12:17:48 GMT -5
Plus/minus for last night's game, as calculated from the play-by-play at guhoyas.com:
Derrickson +7, Hayes +1, Mosely even, Agau -3, Peak -3, Mulmore -4, Pryor -4, Johnson -10, Govan -14, Cameron DNP/coach's decision, Campbell DNP/illness, Hines DNP/coach's decision, Mourning DNP/coach's decision, Muresan DNP/coach's decision.
|
|
|
Post by bankshot53 on Jan 5, 2017 12:19:05 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? He's had one good year! One! And he didn't even make the NCAAT that year. This is his sixth year as a head coach. I give him (and all coaches) a pass their first few years, but he had losing records in all three. He had a pretty good year two years ago, and a good one last year. But so far this year, he's 2-2 in his league. That's the guy who leads us to the promised land! Of course his players stay for the duration...how many NEC or MAAC players leave early?!? Gotta another suggestion on potential hires? I'd like to hear it 'cause the likes of Tony Bennett, Steve Alford, and Wayne Tinkle aren't coming to a Georgetown in its present condition. BTW, the King Rice thing will be visited again at the end of the season.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2017 12:21:52 GMT -5
Enough said. Have no real opinion than why post? You need to ask yourself that one. By the way - I have a VERY STRONG real opinion about something - but I don't want to force Dan to ban me, so I will keep it to myself.🤐 C'MON....DO IT! I promise* Dan will give you the Coach K/Grayson Allen treatment: and "indefinite" ban that lasts all of one game. *NOT AN ACTUAL PROMISE
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 5, 2017 12:22:17 GMT -5
We basically have a team with a mediocre level of talent with some underperformers (Cameron). That's why we aren't doing well. - EtomicB Whose responsibility is that? I thought the head coach is the head recruiter. I don't think he was absolving the coach at all. Just pointing out that we just ain't that good and should not be so surprised/disappointed by the product on the court given the true level of talent (and probably goes without saying, the failure of the staff to elevate that talent individually and as a unit).
|
|
IDenj
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,528
|
Post by IDenj on Jan 5, 2017 12:22:39 GMT -5
What's a bigger priority for Georgetown and the AD. A successful national basketball program or keeping the Thompsons happy and an influential component of the program? Priorities, in order, spoken from the top: "These are the three commitments we ask you to make when you accept the responsibility for this program: You accept the challenge of coaching in a university that places the highest priority on the academic performance of our students. We do not meet our mission if each of these young men do not perform to the best of their abilities in the classroom. You accept the challenge of setting the highest possible moral standards in the execution of our mission. And you accept the challenge of ensuring that our young men are prepared to go out on the court and win basketball games." Jack DeGioia, April 11, 2003 Doesn't answer the question.
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 5, 2017 12:23:17 GMT -5
By the way - I have a VERY STRONG real opinion about something - but I don't want to force Dan to ban me, so I will keep it to myself.🤐 C'MON....DO IT! I promise* Dan will give you the Coach K/Grayson Allen treatment: and "indefinite" ban that lasts all of one game. *NOT AN ACTUAL PROMISE😂😂😂
|
|