|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 25, 2023 20:57:30 GMT -5
It's great for the program. Cooley and Willard are friends, I am sure this won't be the last event with both of them together.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 25, 2023 11:20:35 GMT -5
To me, the most notable things: - Cooley was there, and took time to do this. These things are so important to building engagement and goodwill. - Recognition we need to compete in the NIL range and need to have at least $3 million or so to do that. This makes me think that NIL efforts, while likely underdeveloped, aren't quite as behind as we may have thought when DeGioia made comments a few months back in London. Unless this changed quickly to hire Cooley. Which is possible. - I am a big "tough schedule," guy. Cooley isn't like Ewing, but he also has never scheduled tough OOCs either. So, I don't love that answer, but not in any way surprised, either. - If Cooley's full staff isn't in place, and they are waiting for that to make announcements, that could explain why there hasn't been any press release. - I like Cooley's approach to recruiting of taking transfers with a lot of eligibility, plus freshman. The extra COVID year has artificially inflated the number of older players, but that will increasingly be less of a factor. The extra COVID year was given to those who played in 2020-2021. So, anyone playing that season will have 5 years. That means for a normal freshman who started in 2020-2021, they will have 2021-2022, 2023-2023, 2023-2024, and 2024-2025, since the first year does not count. So, 2025 will be the end of the "older" 5 year players. [If this is wrong, correct me, and I'll correct this post.] Basically, after this year the only guys with the "extra" eligibility left will be freshman who started in 2020-2021. More generally, I do think balance is needed. You cannot stock a team only with transfers, even if it is tough to prevent people from leaving. I do think Cooley's charisma and approach lend itself to player retention far better than what we've had the last 6 years, though.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 25, 2023 9:29:14 GMT -5
For whatever reason, Georgetown has always waited until fairly late to officially post its full roster, at least under Ewing. I don't know if it's incompetence, being lazy, or deliberate for some reason. I do recall the one year where Tre King's future was in doubt, the roster was held seemingly for that reason.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 24, 2023 15:33:06 GMT -5
A high major head basketball coach has about a million things to worry about, getting a website updated or a press release out should not be something he is responsible for or devoting even a second's worth of attention to. I know you want to paint everything wrong with the program as his fault because it suits your agenda, but this is clearly a matter for the SID who does not report to Ed. I am happy the coach is focusing on things that actually matter. It does underscore that change/improvement/modernization is still badly needed elsewhere in the athletic department. But it is not on Cooley to fix. Where did I say that Cooley himself had to do things like updating the website or doing press releases? You'd think an organization that pays $5M-$6M for its head coach, another $2M or so for assistants, and is willing to shell out $4M in NIL for Hunter Dickinson could find some low level/intern-type folks to perform these activities. Cooley to Georgetown was in the works since at least late-February. All somebody had to do was cut and paste the Providence coaching staff bios to a Word document, update them a bit to include last year's results and some welcome to Georgetown language and voila, you've got what you need. This isn't hard, I strongly stand by my comment that it doesn't have to be an "either-or" situation. I understand your point, but I think the key part of your sentence that you are ignoring is "an organization." Who is the "organization"? Georgetown University. More specifically, the basketball program, which at least until a month ago, had very little reporting structure to the atheltic department and to some significant degree operated separately from the rest of athletics. And until about a month ago, we had people like Ronnie Thompson, Howze, and others running the program (and not just last year but for many years before that). Given that nearly the entire "organization" (i.e., the basketball program) has been replaced with the last month, and not all of the replacements have been on board for very long, I think it requires patience. I also think Georgetown paying Cooley $5-$6 million is frankly irrelevant to this issue. You are describing a weakness of Georgetown. Frankly if you are paying a college basketball coach as the highest paid university employee (probably true at every high major D-1 university), this should be handled well. So yes, if your point is that a university willing to pay Cooley $5 million a year should be able to issue press releases, I will agree with you on that. But, frankly, a university that paid Ewing $4 million (and still is), and paid JT3 a similar sum before that, should have been able to do similar things (including, when you do issue a press release, not having bad typos or factual inaccuracies). This is the same university that barely communicated with the public about basketball over the last decade, and the same university (and university President) that gave Patrick Ewing a $12 million extension when there was no reason to do it, and also gave him a chance to coach another season after going 0-20. We aren't exactly talking about an "organization" that has been hitting it out of the park in the last several years, and so while lack of a press release might reflect a weakness, it's one of many weaknesses of the "organization" that Cooley has seemingly been aggressively trying to work to fix over the last month. And he's been focused on much bigger ones than press releases. As others said (and you agreed), this isn't really even a Cooley issue. I am confident if Pitino was the coach instead, that many of the same things (or lack of things, like press releases) would probably be happening. As to your point about finding interns, etc. who could do it--I am sure there are plenty of Georgetown students who would volunteer for such a role and probably do an excellent job. But, again, you have to keep in mind that until a month ago, the "organization" had so many walls around it, that you know full well that would have never happened. For now, I really see this is a non-issue, and frankly, one that only a tiny set of super fans even care about. Most Georgetown fans, especially more casual ones, know that Cooley is the new coach and that's it. Most fans will never even know the names of the assistant coaches or other roles. And almost everyone that has an interest in the assistants already knows who they are. It's just not a big deal. Could it be indicative of other problems? Maybe, but I am not buying it now.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 23, 2023 22:57:51 GMT -5
The commitment period is not over but, so far, I am disappointed in our recruitment. Epps appears to be the lone transfer of impact and there are two frosh, Fielder and Brumbaugh, who may or may not be impact players this coming year. Hope things pick up or we are looking at another down year. We so underperformed our abilities the last two seasons that I think we can see a good bit of improvement, even if we do not get a high impact transfer like Dickinson. One way or the other, the roster is going to fill in more than it is now; that will obviously have a major impact on us one way or the other. Keep in mind also that we can improve A LOT this year and still not be that good a team. Given that we finished 219 on KenPom this past season, I'd like to see a jump to at least 100-ish on KenPom. If we got someone like Dickinson, obviously we'd have a higher ceiling.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 23, 2023 18:02:08 GMT -5
Ed Cooley spent the weekend on the other side of the country to talk to alumni. Virtually every day of his tenure we've seen some evidence that he's engaged the campus outside of the Thompson Athletic Center in some way, shape or form. He's made recruiting DC a priority and trying to repair relationships with basketball alumni a priority. You know who the Coaching Staff is because they've all announced themselves on social media. Ed Cooley said in his introduction who he would be hiring. There's no secrets here. The idea that we're continuing "the same old methods of operations" because the website hasn't been updated is totally absurd. I'd love for them to update the website but they're doing the stuff that matters. When they turned over the staff last year, they updated the website pretty promptly and made photos of Kevin Nickelberry a priority. What they didn't do was any of the other stuff (recruit DC, engage the campus, engage alumni). Which one is more important - the stuff Cooley is doing to engage campus / alumni / DC, or having a website that's updated with glossy photos of Ivan Thomas? I don't see why the program can't do it all reasonably well simultaneously. Cooley can't do it alone, while we see the evidence he's doing his part, what's Reed doing? Same question for the PR & marketing teams. Since this is the Asst. coach thread why can't we hear from Thomas or Blaney while Cooley is busy repairing relationships with alumni, current students & former players? I understand the frustration, and in principle I agree with you. But, practically, Cooley is taking over a program that was stuck in 1985. Is it easy to issue a press release naming the new staff? Yes. Is it easy for a program whose staff has largely been gutted over the last month (which is good!) and is still in the process of being replaced? Maybe, maybe not. For all we know, whoever was in charge of Georgetown's error-prone press releases was fired (again, likely a good thing), and nobody has replaced that person yet. Should someone else fill in ideally, yes, but again, that's not always how things work considering how isolated basketball has been from everything else for the last 50 years. As for Reed, we know his involvement in the basketball program was limited, at least up to now has been extremely limited, so I think there's likely a learning curve in figuring out however Cooley wants to do things. Expecting an institution like Georgetown to do everything correctly a month after doing very little well administratively, at least for 10 years, if not longer, is a stretch.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 23, 2023 11:54:52 GMT -5
Ed Cooley spent the weekend on the other side of the country to talk to alumni. Virtually every day of his tenure we've seen some evidence that he's engaged the campus outside of the Thompson Athletic Center in some way, shape or form. He's made recruiting DC a priority and trying to repair relationships with basketball alumni a priority. You know who the Coaching Staff is because they've all announced themselves on social media. Ed Cooley said in his introduction who he would be hiring. There's no secrets here. The idea that we're continuing "the same old methods of operations" because the website hasn't been updated is totally absurd. I'd love for them to update the website but they're doing the stuff that matters. When they turned over the staff last year, they updated the website pretty promptly and made photos of Kevin Nickelberry a priority. What they didn't do was any of the other stuff (recruit DC, engage the campus, engage alumni). Which one is more important - the stuff Cooley is doing to engage campus / alumni / DC, or having a website that's updated with glossy photos of Ivan Thomas?It shouldn't be an either-or, it should be both, particularly at the prices we're paying. Agreed, but we are also only a month or so into Cooley, and Cooley has already done many things that would have been unfathomable in the past. While I agree there is no either-or, I think it's also unrealistic to expect everything to be perfect after a month. You cannot reverse decades of one approach in just a month, but Cooley has done more than I could even hope for so far--most notably, by being a part of the community, getting out there, and building relationships. If I had to choose website v. the community outreach, public appearances, etc. I would take the latter any time.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 23, 2023 9:33:02 GMT -5
It would be nice if Ed would officially announce those on his staff who he has hired. It's another indication that Gtown has a new coach but the same old methods of operation I understand your point, but the guy has only been the coach for about a month. It's possible that the person who would be handling this was only just hired or not even hired yet. Georgetown inertia is real, though, so I get where you're coming from. And I do think it's kind of absurd that the staff hasn't been announced yet.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 21, 2023 7:01:31 GMT -5
Yes. I think Connecticut was one of the best teams this year, and definitely by the time the tournament occurred and seeding occurred. The NCAA underseeded Connecticut. Someone explain this to me. Shouldn't The lower seeded team, on paper, have a tougher road to the finals? Perhaps, but it doesn't work out that way for numerous reasons. Seeding teams is an inexact science. No matter what system you use, it is going to be imperfect. The NCAA uses a number of factors, such as the NET rankings, looking at the quadrant-by-quadrant wins/losses, and also metrics like KenPom. In the past, the NCAA used RPI, which is just another way to rank teams, but it differs from NET and other similar rankings. No matter what system you use, there are going to be times when it is not accurate. For example, Connecticut's seeding was held down by its record and rough patch in the middle of the Big East season, but all the advanced metrics placed them as a top 5-ish type team at the end of the year. Further, he seeding begins to fall apart after upsets happen. For example, take the example of San Diego State, which made the finals. In the first round, San Diego State (5 seed) beat Charleston (12 seed). But, in the second round, they played Furman (13) seed that had upset Virginia. Had Virginia won that game, San Diego State's path to the championship would have been a lot harder. Or take Florida Atlantic. Had Fairleigh Dickinson not beat Purdue, Florida Atlantic's run to the Final Four may have been quashed in the second round. There is just a lot of variance in the NCAA tournament because it's single elimination. It's just the nature of the beast. Think about it like flipping a coin. If you flip a coin once, you're going to either get heads or tails. If you do it twice, there's still a good chance you'll get two heads in a row. But if you flip it 1000 times, you'll be extremely close to 50/50.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 20, 2023 13:29:19 GMT -5
Do you question that UConn was the best team in the country by the time the tourney rolled around? Yes. I think Connecticut was one of the best teams this year, and definitely by the time the tournament occurred and seeding occurred. The NCAA underseeded Connecticut.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 20, 2023 8:31:27 GMT -5
The tournament is a great amount of “fun”. Lol The tournament is where everything matters. You are either are clutch or you choke. Everything is on the line. I agree with all of this; but it's not inconsistent with anything else I am saying. It can be important, fun, and intense, while also not being 100% dispositive regarding the best team, and certainly not of the best conference. Apologies to guru if this email is a microaggression that further triggers you.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 20, 2023 8:20:58 GMT -5
I think any rule that determines who was or was not a Hoya would rule out someone that most of the board would agree was truly a Hoya. How about Tyler Adams? “We don’t need no stinking rules”. If you wore a Georgetown uniform you were a Hoya. Tyler Adams never, to my knowledge, suited up for another school after being at GU.. And I agree that, if you wore the uni, you were a Hoya. Tyler Adams wore the uniform for four years. He was on the official roster each of his years at Georgetown. He played a handful of games as a freshman and then the one possession as a senior. He absolutely under any definition would be a full Hoya, and a great one at that. I will always appreciate that in that game as a senior that Willard called off his players at Seton Hall to allow Adams to get a dunk. Willard said, ""The biggest thing to us was to show respect to a young man who has gone through a very tough time and has stayed positive," Willard said Monday. "The best thing to do was show respect to someone who has earned that moment." Very classy. JT3 did not reciprocate (in my mind, a horrible move, and I generally supported JT3), though Seton Hall did score on the following possession. I encourage anybody who wasn't around at the time to read up on Adams, a class act, and one of the people we should all be proud of. He's currently an assistant coach at Jackson State. There are multiple articles about him from the time, but this is just one: georgetownvoice.com/2015/01/14/the-heart-of-a-champion-the-tyler-adams-story/
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 19, 2023 18:13:04 GMT -5
All due respect to you and your precious kenpom, but Houston is not beating Miami 81 out of 100 times, as anyone who watched the game would tell you. Furthermore, Maryland is not slightly superior to Miami, as KenPom would have you believe. Statistical analysis of NCAA Men's Basketball can be instructive, but your reliance on it to mask your ignorance and/or indifference to the games being played is a real bore. You are missing the point. Obviously, the KenPom rankings are statistical projections and not always accurate. Just because KenPom puts odds at 19% or whatever doesn't mean those are the "real" odds. But, the point is, if Houston and Miami play one another 100 times, Miami is going to win some of those games, and Houston isn't going to win all of them. I don't think you realize how much variance exists in basketball. I do not have ignorance or indifference to the games being played. As I said, I think the NCAA tournament format is a really fun way to determine a champion (and I want it to be Georgetown!), it just doesn't necessarily select the "best" team because there is a lot of luck and chance involved depending on matchups, who gets streaky, etc. Fairleigh Dickinson is a great example. First, they should not have even been in the tournament at all, because Merrimack won the conference tournament, but was too new to Division 1 to get a bid under the rules, so it fell to Fairleigh Dickinson. Second, Fairleigh Dickinson beating Purdue was extremely unlikely. Does that mean Fairleigh Dickinson is a better team than Purdue? Absolutely not. If Purdue/Fairleigh Dickinson played a best of 7 series, there's no way Fairleigh Dickinson would ever win. But, in a one game elimination, anything can happen. Same for Virginia losing to Furman by 1 point. Does that mean Furman is the better team? Of course not. But, they won the single elimination game. I am not really sure why you are getting belligerent over this. As I said, the tournament is a great amount of fun. You just cannot make accurate broad-based assessments about conference performance and teams based on the tournament alone, particularly if you are limiting yourself to a few games.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 19, 2023 18:03:38 GMT -5
I think any rule that determines who was or was not a Hoya would rule out someone that most of the board would agree was truly a Hoya. How about Tyler Adams? “We don’t need no stinking rules”. If you wore a Georgetown uniform you were a Hoya. Obviously, this is all subjective to begin with. But, to the point made earlier, the title is "Once a Hoya..." and that's basically anybody that's put on a uniform at Georgetown. Whether to consider them a "Hoya" for purposes of being alumni or any other reasons is a whole other question that's highly subjective and depends on who is giving their opinion. But, I think it's obvious that guys who are here one year and then leave are going to have less allegiance themselves, and also less fan allegiance, too. I'll leave it to others to figure out if they are Hoyas or not. I am curious how the university officially recognizes alumni. For example, I know some schools do include people who transfer and do not graduate as "alumni." DFW, do you know?
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 19, 2023 11:19:31 GMT -5
#24 Miami beat #2 Houston and #5 Texas #14 San Diego State beat #4 Alabama, #12 Creighton and #17 Florida Atlantic #17 Florida Atlantic beat #6 Tennessee and #21 Kansas State Rankings are post-tourney KenPom. It’s almost like weird things happen in very small samples. Again, this is what happens when you do single elimination tournaments. For example, KenPom said that Houston was 81.3% to beat Miami. That means that, on average, if they kept playing Miami would win about 19 out of 100 times. While those are low odds, it still shows that in the long-run Miami is going to win a fair number of times. Alabama was 75% to beat San Diego State. Again, that means that if you played 100 games, San Diego State would win 25 times. That's a lot, and while "unlikely," San Diego State winning in that scenario isn't crazy. KenPom had the San Diego State/Creighton game at basically 50-50, San Diego won by 1 point. So, not sure what you think this even tells us. Florida Atlantic's odds of beating Tennessee were 30%, and Florida Atlantic was actually just over 50% to beat Kansas State, so again that's another 50-50 game. When you have a single elimination 50-50 type game, variance/luck/who is hot is going to affect the outcome a lot more in that one game. A single game like that is virtually useless in telling us who is really "better." I am not sure if anybody here plays poker regularly (or did in the past), but if you do, you'd know that 20% outcomes, even if unlikely, happen ALL THE TIME.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 19, 2023 11:13:35 GMT -5
I am not a "slave" to KenPom, it's just a useful way to rank all 300+ Division 1 teams. You cannot use the Top 25 or other metrics to do it. There are plenty of other ones, Bart Torvik, Haslemetrics. While I am sure the details would be slightly different, I bet those show very similar things. I say this all the time, but a single elimination tournament is NOT a good way to choose the "best" team in basketball. This is, in part, why the NBA, MLB, and the NHL do not use single elimination tournaments, but rather have multi-game playoffs. Football is single elimination, but that's in part because in football you just cannot play that many games. Now, in this instance, UConn was a very good team and underseeded. Going into the tournament, KenPom had UConn at 4th overall (i.e., a 1 seed). So, while you make fun of KenPom, KenPom actually put UConn as being much better than its record. Again, it's single elimination so you can only make so many conclusions, though I do think the fact that UConn steamrolled its way through the tournament did show they were legitimately very good. If basketball had best of 5 series, etc., the Cinderella type stories would all but disappear. Fairleigh Dickinson (or anyone else) can get lucky and win a game or two. But, you're not going to do that against superior times if you play multiple games against much better teams. That's why the tournament is fun. The single-elimination format adds a lot of variance, and makes it fun. But that's also why it's silly to use the tournament to evaluate these teams. Put differently: The Big East plays 110 conference games, with each team playing 20 games. You can learn a lot more about a team as a whole over those games than in a handful of games in a single elimination format. That's why we play the regular season. You said "by any measure" the Big 12 had the best conference last year, and while it is true single elimination tourneys don't prove things beyond a doubt, they are better than KenPom, wouldn't you say? Yes, by any measure, the Big 12 was the best conference. When you talk about a conference that involves the entire conference. The entire conference does not play in the NCAA tournament. UConn is the national champion and they did great in the tournament, and they were one of the best teams in the country for sure. But it's a big stretch to say that the Big East is the "best" conference because one of its eleven teams won the national championship. And no, a single elimination tournament is absolutely not a better way to determine what conference is better than another than KenPom, or even just looking at the conference records themselves. The Big East, for example, plays 110 conference games, and yet you want to decide the quality of the conference based on a handful of games in the NCAA tournament. That makes no sense. Small sample sizes are not very illustrative (even if they are fun, like the NCAA tournament).
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 18, 2023 17:49:52 GMT -5
The Big East was strong this year, but the Big 12 was stronger top to bottom. The Big 12 had no bottom dwellers, like Georgetown and DePaul this past year, AND they had a bunch of really good teams. Here are the KenPom rankings for the Big 12: KenPomRank: 5, Texas (2 seed), 12-6 in conference KenPomRank: 9, Kansas (1 seed), 13-5 in conference KenPomRank: 16, Baylor (3 seed), 11-7 in conference KenPomRank: 19, West Virginia (9 seed), 7-11 in conference KenPomRank: 21, Kansas St. (3 seed), 11-7 in conference KenPomRank: 25, TCU (6 seed, 9-9 in conference KenPomRank: 29, Iowa St. (6 seed), 9-9 in conference KenPomRank: 46, Oklahoma State, 8-10 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 54, Oklahoma, 5-13 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 63, Texas Tech, 5-13 in conference, no bid The Big East: KenPomRank: 1, Connecticut (1 seed), 13-7 in conference KenPomRank: 10, Marquette (2 seed), 17-3 in conference KenPomRank: 12, Creighton (6 seed), 14-6 in conference KenPomRank: 15, Xavier (3 seed), 15-5 in conference KenPomRank: 40, Providence, 13-7 (11 seed) in conference KenPomRank: 51, Villanova, 10-10 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 58, Seton Hall, 10-10 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 82, St. John's, 7-13 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 119 Butler, 6-14 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 135, DePaul, 3-17 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 219, Georgetown, 2-18 in conference, no bid Really, by any measure, the Big 12 was easily the best basketball conference last year. The Big East had FOUR teams worse than the worst Big 12 team. I love the Big East, but last year the Big East was not even close to as good as the Big 12 (nor was any other conference). (Note: Based on KenPom, the "new" Big East has never been #1 since 2014, though it was #2 in 2015, and has been #3 many times. It was only 6th once, in 2021. This is why "Power 5" annoys me when it comes to basketball, as by any measure, any top five for basketball would include the Big East.) I know you are a slave to KenPom, but according to the recently completed NCAA Tournament, the Big East was, in fact, better by a long shot than the Big 12. Big East 12-4 with runaway tourney champion Big 12 9-7 with no teams in Final Four Or, was it just a lucky Big East run I am not a "slave" to KenPom, it's just a useful way to rank all 300+ Division 1 teams. You cannot use the Top 25 or other metrics to do it. There are plenty of other ones, Bart Torvik, Haslemetrics. While I am sure the details would be slightly different, I bet those show very similar things. I say this all the time, but a single elimination tournament is NOT a good way to choose the "best" team in basketball. This is, in part, why the NBA, MLB, and the NHL do not use single elimination tournaments, but rather have multi-game playoffs. Football is single elimination, but that's in part because in football you just cannot play that many games. Now, in this instance, UConn was a very good team and underseeded. Going into the tournament, KenPom had UConn at 4th overall (i.e., a 1 seed). So, while you make fun of KenPom, KenPom actually put UConn as being much better than its record. Again, it's single elimination so you can only make so many conclusions, though I do think the fact that UConn steamrolled its way through the tournament did show they were legitimately very good. If basketball had best of 5 series, etc., the Cinderella type stories would all but disappear. Fairleigh Dickinson (or anyone else) can get lucky and win a game or two. But, you're not going to do that against superior times if you play multiple games against much better teams. That's why the tournament is fun. The single-elimination format adds a lot of variance, and makes it fun. But that's also why it's silly to use the tournament to evaluate these teams. Put differently: The Big East plays 110 conference games, with each team playing 20 games. You can learn a lot more about a team as a whole over those games than in a handful of games in a single elimination format. That's why we play the regular season.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 18, 2023 13:04:28 GMT -5
For example, a key reason the Big 12 got 7 of their 10 teams in the tourney was because people nationwide thought the Big 12 was the best league. How exactly do you support this one? KenPom had the Big 12 as the top conference by a pretty wide margin. Was that just because people nationwide thought it was the best? Does he have a variable to adjust his formula for what people nationwide think to be true? The Big East was strong this year, but the Big 12 was stronger top to bottom. The Big 12 had no bottom dwellers, like Georgetown and DePaul this past year, AND they had a bunch of really good teams. Here are the KenPom rankings for the Big 12: KenPomRank: 5, Texas (2 seed), 12-6 in conference KenPomRank: 9, Kansas (1 seed), 13-5 in conference KenPomRank: 16, Baylor (3 seed), 11-7 in conference KenPomRank: 19, West Virginia (9 seed), 7-11 in conference KenPomRank: 21, Kansas St. (3 seed), 11-7 in conference KenPomRank: 25, TCU (6 seed, 9-9 in conference KenPomRank: 29, Iowa St. (6 seed), 9-9 in conference KenPomRank: 46, Oklahoma State, 8-10 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 54, Oklahoma, 5-13 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 63, Texas Tech, 5-13 in conference, no bid The Big East: KenPomRank: 1, Connecticut (1 seed), 13-7 in conference KenPomRank: 10, Marquette (2 seed), 17-3 in conference KenPomRank: 12, Creighton (6 seed), 14-6 in conference KenPomRank: 15, Xavier (3 seed), 15-5 in conference KenPomRank: 40, Providence, 13-7 (11 seed) in conference KenPomRank: 51, Villanova, 10-10 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 58, Seton Hall, 10-10 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 82, St. John's, 7-13 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 119 Butler, 6-14 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 135, DePaul, 3-17 in conference, no bid KenPomRank: 219, Georgetown, 2-18 in conference, no bid Really, by any measure, the Big 12 was easily the best basketball conference last year. The Big East had FOUR teams worse than the worst Big 12 team. I love the Big East, but last year the Big East was not even close to as good as the Big 12 (nor was any other conference). (Note: Based on KenPom, the "new" Big East has never been #1 since 2014, though it was #2 in 2015, and has been #3 many times. It was only 6th once, in 2021. This is why "Power 5" annoys me when it comes to basketball, as by any measure, any top five for basketball would include the Big East.)
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 17, 2023 16:22:18 GMT -5
Who is Big Nate? And why is he relevant to DMV recruiting?
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Apr 17, 2023 13:11:22 GMT -5
It depends on what you mean by "market value." Any bids that Dickinson gets are for his "market value" in the NIL system. In other words, how much money are donors/collectives willing to pay Dickinson to come to their university? But, does that reflect a "market value" in literal name, likeness, image, terms? No. Do I think Dickinson is going to move $1,000,000 of product because of his name, image, and likeness? No. Did Brandon Murray move $300,000-$400,000 value based on his name, image and likeness last year? Very unlikely. Why should anyone consider market value in any other way besides the NIL system? In some ways, this is semantic. A more appropriate name for it would be something similar to a "Player Bonus" or "Player Incentive," because that's what it is. It's not actually payments for their name, image, and likeness. It's just funneled into that category because it's illegal to pay them salaries or bonuses. Of course, this is what we have, and they have a market value within that system. And it might be called NIL, but it isn't that in practice.
|
|