GUHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,083
|
Post by GUHoya07 on Feb 18, 2005 22:34:26 GMT -5
Wow, his name is popping up all over the place. I would really be surprised if he got the Tulsa job as I think of that as more of a place for young up and coming talent. In his favor, they would probably like to have a more steady head coach then one who leaves after a couple of seasons of success, but the Tulsa job just doesn't seem like one that Esh would get in my opinion. However, its very possible that I could be wrong.
|
|
lichoya68
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
OK YOUNGINS ARE HERE AND ARE VERY VERY GOOD cant wait GO HOYAS
Posts: 17,440
|
Post by lichoya68 on Feb 18, 2005 22:47:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Feb 18, 2005 22:48:31 GMT -5
At some point, the Georgetown fan base has to come to terms with Craig Esherick and stop projecting all the program's sins upon him. By reading some of these posts (and that's without the real heavy artillery from a Dose, a Prov, or a Van) you would think there are lots of people who would wish Craig Esherick was a pariah, endlessly wandering the streets as the hoia polloi pass by. We ought to know better. The word "irrelevant" was borrowed from this board and spread by columnists nationwide. But it wasn't Craig Esherick that made Georgetown irrelevant. Georgetown made Georgetown irrelevant. The benign institutional neglect of men's basketball in the 1990's brought Georgetown to 2003-04. It was often easier to extol the good old days than plan for the new ones. And so it was with Craig Esherick, who brought a healthy dose of hubris when confronted with a program and record that was flattening out and opted to retreat rather than move forward. Of course, Georgetrown was never truly irrelevant. Irrelevant is UMBC, Radford, Wright State, Stetson, Denver, Pan American-- places on the Division I map which will never make an impact. But if not irrelevant, Georgetown had become indifferent--its administration, its alumni, its students. As such, Craig was the symbol of this. Had John Jr. been sitting in the chair in 2003, a lot of the discontent would have been upon him, too. Instead of enbracing change, Craig seemed to recoil from it. It was easier for him to fall back on how he was a key part of a NCAA title, three Final Fours and how he was the top recruiter for most of Georgetown' stars (which, in fact, he was) than try to rebuild beyond the Thompson formula. Digger Phelps had a great point on this during last week's game. Joey Meyer, he said could have been a better coach at DePaul but never gained experience outside the DePaul environment. Better to have had Meyer get 3-4 years elsewhere and come back to DU than to sit on the bench. That's what befell Esherick, and, no surprise, it's what is now staring Johnny Dawkins straight between the eyes. To the point above that Henry Hyde and Bill Clinton weren't "family", well, they were only alumni. To be a member of a team and a program so tight as Georgetown is a stronger bond. And that's why, with few exceptions, the ties are pretty strong. When AI makes the All-Star Game or Ron Blaylock closes a nine-figure deal, the family takes pride in it. When a Victor Page ends up in a hospital, the family is concerned. And for the most part when a player falls short in some endeavor, the family (and its fans) remain supportive. No one belittled Horace Broadnax for his coaching record at Bethune Cookman. Ronny Thompson applied for at least five head coaching jobs in four years and wasn't a finalist in any of them. If it's the sixth or sixteenth interview that lands him a HC job, the family stays supportive. You don't have to like Craig Esherick, but he's as much a part of Hoya basketball as anyone and frankly deserves the respect to say that if he wants to earn a living in coaching, that he have the ability to do so. I disagree profoundly with some of the points made herein. The GU team of 2003-2004 was largely Esherick's own making. Why? Well, he lost entire recruiting classes to transfer. Why did the players leave? Let's be honest here. It had nothing to do with the fact that the players could not role out of VCW to play home games in McDonough. Wesley Wilson, Mike Sweetney, Drew Hall, Tony Bethel, Harvey Thomas, etc. all left the program before their eligibility was exhausted. Still others learned of the coach's limitations and did not enroll (Moore, Townes, etc.). If we have half of those players who could have been eligible in the 03-04 season, we are looking at an '03-'04 team that could have made some noise. What you saw in 2003-2004 was not a team that reacted poorly to the institutional environment but a team that had lost faith in its coach, and rightly so. At points during the season, he expressed disinterest in watching game films. That is neglect, but it is not institutional neglect. It is professional neglect. Now,sure things deteriorated in the 1990's. Why is that? Well, a good case could be made that JT2 slouched off a bit in his recruiting and did not keep pace with changes in college basketball. Even still, his teams would make the postseason and would make a good run in the postseason every once in a while. Once Esherick had his own players, his next door neighbor in the seat next to him, and so forth, his program did not become a perennial postseason contender or team. Esherick failed as a coach here and failed to keep his employment because of himself. He was given a second chance with the contract extension, and he flaunted it. He was given a third chance with DeGioia's backing after 03-04, and he flaunted it. Let me pose this question, was Esherick a worthy investment for GU? Was it worthwhile to plunk more money into his program with what was going on? If you are DeGioia and the University is strapped for cash, why do you throw more money behind the program? Now, I do not want to suggest that institutional support does not matter because it does. However, one cannot and should not attribute short term deviations, like the 03-04 season, simply to underlying causes of the problem rather than its proximate causes. Why? Well, the underlying cause has been there for years. We circumvented it at some points due to good COACHING under JT2 and we have done so again this year due to excellent COACHING from JT3. (Institutional neglect has decreased this year, but I would argue that it lagged behind the coaching change somewhat.) As for Esherick and the family, the difference between him and the others who you mentioned is they never attacked, if not insulted, the "family" and/or the broader community of which it is a part. I respected him as a person and was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until he "resented the hell" out of comments that suggested he should be evaluated in part on the basis of on-the-court results. I respected him up until he suggested that our President was disingenuous about his status as the coach. Those comments were hurtful to me and were beneath the level of what is worthy of the Georgetown community.
|
|
Joe Hoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
You're watching Sports Night on CSC, so stick around.
Posts: 1,236
|
Post by Joe Hoya on Feb 18, 2005 23:01:04 GMT -5
I respected him up until he suggested that our President was disingenuous about his status as the coach. But he was, wasn't he? I believe we all would have (if it was posted here anywhere) ripped the Syracuse athletic department for what they did to Paul Pasqualoni this year, and deservedly so. But that's the same thing that happened at Georgetown in March of last year.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Feb 18, 2005 23:08:16 GMT -5
"I believe that this season's men's basketball team and our new class of recruits holds a great deal of promise. I have confidence that Craig Esherick, who helped to build our tradition of excellence in men's basketball, is the right person to strengthen and lead our program." Disingenuous action would imply that DeGioia was not straightforward in some way with Esherick. He was. He indicated that Esherick had his support. Why did it change? It was not some plot to oust Esherick. Indeed, he would have been here if Esherick did not run his mouth. So what happened? The confidence that DeGioia once had in him dropped off, and rightly so. The difference with Pasqualoni is that, to my knowledge, he didn't attack certain fans and media folks verbally (indirectly) once he got a vote of confidence.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,769
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Feb 18, 2005 23:11:19 GMT -5
The GU team of 2003-2004 was largely Esherick's own making. Why? Well, he lost entire recruiting classes to transfer. Why did the players leave? Let's be honest here. It had nothing to do with the fact that the players could not role out of VCW to play home games in McDonough. Wesley Wilson, Mike Sweetney, Drew Hall, Tony Bethel, Harvey Thomas, etc. all left the program before their eligibility was exhausted. Still others learned of the coach's limitations and did not enroll (Moore, Townes, etc.). Point of clarification: Wesley Wilson did not "leave" the program after this grandfather died. Esherick flat out said he was not kicked off the team. Wilson attended the Hoop Club banquet with the team, finished his senior year and graduated. To the point below, he was not eligible for a fifth year because he was a non-qualifier. Disingenuous action would imply that DeGioia was not straightforward in some way with Esherick. He was. He indicated that Esherick had his support. Why did it change? It was not some plot to oust Esherick. Indeed, he would have been here if Esherick did not run his mouth. So what happened? The confidence that DeGioia once had in him dropped off, and rightly so. Good people can disagree on this one. Years of public statements of confidence and support do not do a complete 180 in 10 days without other factors coming into play.
|
|
|
Post by jerseyhoya34 on Feb 18, 2005 23:15:09 GMT -5
Point of clarification: Wesley Wilson did not "leave" the program after this grandfather died. Esherick flat out said he was not kicked off the team. Wilson attended the Hoop Club banquet with the team, finished his senior year and graduated. On the disingenuousness aspect, DeGioia would be disingenuous if he was pursuing other avenues at the time of his public statement of support in March 2004. I sincerely believe that he was not pursuing these avenues. If he had his hand forced in some way by donors who threatened to pull the rug out from under the University and its efforts to upgrade certain aspects of the university, that's a different story because it involves coercion and duress. However, I do see where some may see things in a different way. Let me re-pose the question: was basketball a worthy investment for GU? If so, you build a program for tomorrow, not just to get by for today. It was known in Big East circles that Georgetown considerably underpaid its staff, that it wouldn't commit to build suitable facilities, and that revenues were declining. Recruits saw this too. And some of those same issues are still in play. I said that Wilson left before his eligibility was exhausted. It is true. He was eligible for a fifth year. While he may not have been offered that opportunity, it was a possibility that was either not explored or not desired from one end or another. Your point is well taken, but it does not negate mine. We could recruit in spite of the facilities. Look at our current recruiting class of 2004 and our incoming class of 2005. Also, the assistant coaches were not the problem. Jackson and Dreisell were competent assistants, but they were unfortunately marginalized by other elements of the program.
|
|
|
Post by JohnJacquesLayup on Feb 18, 2005 23:30:40 GMT -5
As for Esherick and the family, the difference between him and the others who you mentioned is they never attacked, if not insulted, the "family" and/or the broader community of which it is a part. I respected him as a person and was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until he "resented the hell" out of comments that suggested he should be evaluated in part on the basis of on-the-court results. I respected him up until he suggested that our President was disingenuous about his status as the coach. Those comments were hurtful to me and were beneath the level of what is worthy of the Georgetown community. Well put. I think many people feel this way, which is why the line between Esherick the coach and Esherick the man has blurred.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,338
|
Post by prhoya on Feb 19, 2005 0:21:38 GMT -5
Many factors contributed to GU's decline from college basketball's elite and there is no denying that Esherick was a big (or the biggest) part of that decline. I can still picture him with a minute to go in close games calling for the "two close fists" play and the players looking lost. I'm so glad he's gone and that the team now wins the close ones. What a difference a year and a coach makes! I'm sorry for the fans that get him because they will be going through what we went through in no time.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,338
|
Post by prhoya on Feb 19, 2005 0:25:54 GMT -5
BTW, did you all notice that nothing gets the Board going as Esherick? Good night...
|
|
dTRAIN
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 189
|
Post by dTRAIN on Feb 19, 2005 0:30:28 GMT -5
Point of clarification: Wesley Wilson did not "leave" the program after this grandfather died. Esherick flat out said he was not kicked off the team. Wilson attended the Hoop Club banquet with the team, finished his senior year and graduated. To the point below, he was not eligible for a fifth year because he was a non-qualifier. Good people can disagree on this one. Years of public statements of confidence and support do not do a complete 180 in 10 days without other factors coming into play. DFW, We all know that the program has systemic problems. Practice facilities, off campus NBA arena, and NBA alumni who surprisingly don't give that much money to the school. But it amazes me how you (and some others like the_way) continually defend Esh. I genuinely appreciate the man for his length of service to Georgetown. He is Blue and Grey all the way. But he was bad for the program. JTIII has given enough evidence of that. Even if you credit Esh for Green and Hibbert (or Hillbert per Digger), the attitude seems so different, Esh had to be part of the problem. I know from talking to WBH that you aren't an apologist and have no real loyalty to Esh, but why do you always feel the need to come to his defense? That being said, I hope he gets the job and does great. And I have no problem with his quote. I'm sure it was taken out of context. Now can we please beat the Jonhnies Sunday and get our NCAA bid. On that we can all agree. d
|
|
Grandpa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 732
|
Post by Grandpa on Feb 19, 2005 0:46:57 GMT -5
|
|
Bay99
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 510
|
Post by Bay99 on Feb 19, 2005 0:48:14 GMT -5
Wasn't that last season's non-conference schedule?
(Thank you. I'll be here all week.)
DFW, a thoughtful and thought-provoking post.
I'll say that regardless of institutional neglect and other grand-scale issues, today's news stoked a lasting, negative memory I have of Esherick: he sounds HORRIBLE in the press. It wouldn't be the first time the media has made someone look bad time and again, but I always felt Esherick lacked the fundamental ability to speak in soundbites. JT Jr. may have loathed the media, but he still used it to his advantage, if nothing else fostering the Hoya Paranoia image associated with his dominant teams.
But I always felt that, win or lose, Esherick presented poorly through the media looking glass. The NIT "controversy" should have made him look like a principled man cut from his predecessor's cloth, yet he came off like a malcontent who just didn't want to travel. The Sweetney tirade was an absolute joke. And the "I might be here forever" (not an exact quote, of course) rant, on the heels of an undeserved and very public display of support from DeGioia was plain embarrassing.
And today, even if taken out of context, his "I'd be a heck of a coach" quote just sounds clownish. He seems to have no concept of the public persona that any major D-1 college coach must master.
|
|
GUHoya07
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,083
|
Post by GUHoya07 on Feb 19, 2005 0:50:53 GMT -5
Interesting that this is getting so much attention. The Title: "New Mexico's coach hunt has a volunteer" and a funny picture
|
|
|
Post by Fan Of The Game on Feb 19, 2005 0:57:50 GMT -5
Another slow Friday in the college hoops world. I guess there wasn't enough excitement in the four Ivy League games or the Marist/Siena battle.
|
|
|
Post by Fan Of The Game on Feb 19, 2005 1:29:37 GMT -5
|
|
Gold Hoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,578
|
Post by Gold Hoya on Feb 19, 2005 1:33:57 GMT -5
'"We don't have the most money; we don't have the best facilities," DeFilippo said. "But there's a better feeling at this institution than any place I've ever been."' Nothing creates good feelings quite like yearly home-and-homes with Va Tech and Miami (Florida).
|
|
TC
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 9,457
|
Post by TC on Feb 19, 2005 11:02:59 GMT -5
Can someone tell me why this isn't a good situation for NMSU or Esh? Because NMSU needs someone to build a program. Craig Esherick is not that guy. Why is a mediocre Big Six coach a good find for a Sun Belt school that is 15 games under .500? If anything, that type of school needs to be looking for a guy who is a top assistant somewhere and who needs to get some head coaching experience at a low level before moving up in the ranks. In this situation, where recruiting is really the #1 priority, the hiring priority should be on someone who can bring in the recruits and who is an expert talent evaluator. That's not Esh. Secondly, all of Esh's experience (college, law school, assistant coaching, head coaching) is at a small elite Catholic school. New Mexico State is a large state school. There's a world of difference between the two. Esherick's main asset is his reputation for running a clean program. I haven't seen anything suggesting that New Mexico State has had any sort of problems. About the only thing here that Esherick fits the profile for is that he took over for a legend, and he would have to do the same thing at New Mexico State. Ed Martin (the guy who paid off Webber) has about the same chance of coaching Michigan as Craig Esherick does.
|
|
GIGAFAN99
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,487
|
Post by GIGAFAN99 on Feb 19, 2005 11:20:34 GMT -5
Because NMSU needs someone to build a program. Craig Esherick is not that guy. Why is a mediocre Big Six coach a good find for a Sun Belt school that is 15 games under .500? If anything, that type of school needs to be looking for a guy who is a top assistant somewhere and who needs to get some head coaching experience at a low level before moving up in the ranks. In this situation, where recruiting is really the #1 priority, the hiring priority should be on someone who can bring in the recruits and who is an expert talent evaluator. That's not Esh. Secondly, all of Esh's experience (college, law school, assistant coaching, head coaching) is at a small elite Catholic school. New Mexico State is a large state school. There's a world of difference between the two. Esherick's main asset is his reputation for running a clean program. I haven't seen anything suggesting that New Mexico State has had any sort of problems. About the only thing here that Esherick fits the profile for is that he took over for a legend, and he would have to do the same thing at New Mexico State. Ed Martin (the guy who paid off Webber) has about the same chance of coaching Michigan as Craig Esherick does. Tommy Amaker is and he had the same resume as Esherick. And they've done a fantastically sub .500 job under Amaker. That apparently slipped past you, but was the point of that statement. For some reason John Thompson's main recuriter might be considered an "expert talent evaluator" by, oh, most people in college baskeball. I know though, what has he done lately? It's not like he recruited a guy who was top 300 as a junior and turned out to be one of the top 3 freshmen in the country or anything. If he did something like that, he might be at least an average recruiter
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,338
|
Post by prhoya on Feb 19, 2005 11:28:04 GMT -5
Frankly, it's amazing how people still think Esherick's record at GU could have been an average of 19 wins per year. Sure, that's what it reflects, but the reality is that this number should have an asterisk next to it, with the accompanying note mentioning that 12 to 10 wins a year were against the Elon colleges of the NCAA. He used these yearly games to bolster his overall record and counterbalance his horrendous BE record. Now he is using the same record as part of his resume? Does it have the asterisk? Shameful...
|
|