eagle54
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,471 
|
Post by eagle54 on Jan 15, 2017 21:31:34 GMT -5
How can this school figure it out until they get someone who can build a winning culture. If we lose Peak next year how will we even have a chance at being remotely better than this season even with our PG recruit? |
|
bamahoya11
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,831
|
Post by bamahoya11 on Jan 15, 2017 21:43:56 GMT -5
How can this school figure it out until they get someone who can build a winning culture. If we lose Peak next year how will we even have a chance at being remotely better than this season even with our PG recruit? I'm not offering a defense of JTIII, just offering the column as an additional view to our collective discussion on the state of the program/JTIII's leadership. I totally agree that we need to institute a winning culture -- I've noted that in a few of the recent game discussions in which our end-of-game performance has made it clear that we don't have a winning culture at the moment. At this point, I haven't thought forward to how we will look next year. A new point guard isn't going to fix all that ails us, LJ or no LJ. And frankly, the column itself doesn't really make me want to go to bat for JTIII's leadership. I do think that firing JTIII is more complicated than some folks make it out to be. The man has made a Final 4 and has won a whole lot of games over his career. As of a couple of years ago, he had one of the longest consecutive streaks with wins over a top 10 team. It's not as easy, I think, to just fire him and replace him with some mid-major coach who has a lot of potential but hasn't really done anything in terms of building sustained post-season success. A lot of the names thrown around on this board don't really get me just enthralled about making a change. As I've said before on the board, though, I'm open to the idea. I'm not going to sit here and pretend that current performance is acceptable. But I'm also not going to just sit here and bash JTIII over and over. I've been clear the program isn't where it needs to be. I expect the staff and the administration to have higher standards for the program. I hope they hold JTIII accountable for the state of the program. But in the meantime, I hope the kids and staff we do have right now find a way to keep winning, and I'll pull for them as long as they're out there. |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jan 16, 2017 16:50:08 GMT -5
I totally agree that we need to institute a winning culture -- I've noted that in a few of the recent game discussions in which our end-of-game performance has made it clear that we don't have a winning culture at the moment. What exactly is a winning culture? Do you mean we just need to win games? I think it's clear that JT3 and staff are certainly trying to do that - even if they haven't been succeeding as much as we'd (and they) like. To me, we just need to play better and, where feasible, develop skills to aid in improvement. Especially after the Connecticut game, I don't see how anybody could question the players' or staff's effort (this isn't aimed at you bamahoya11, but others have repeatedly said that our guys don't play with enough effort). Clearly, they are pouring a lot into the games and trying hard. But that doesn't mean they'll win. |
|
bamahoya11
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,831
|
Post by bamahoya11 on Jan 16, 2017 20:20:36 GMT -5
I totally agree that we need to institute a winning culture -- I've noted that in a few of the recent game discussions in which our end-of-game performance has made it clear that we don't have a winning culture at the moment. What exactly is a winning culture? Do you mean we just need to win games? I think it's clear that JT3 and staff are certainly trying to do that - even if they haven't been succeeding as much as we'd (and they) like. To me, we just need to play better and, where feasible, develop skills to aid in improvement. Especially after the Connecticut game, I don't see how anybody could question the players' or staff's effort (this isn't aimed at you bamahoya11, but others have repeatedly said that our guys don't play with enough effort). Clearly, they are pouring a lot into the games and trying hard. But that doesn't mean they'll win. I like the question, and to the extent that I could be construed to suggest otherwise, I think the staff is spending a ton of time trying to get this right. Looking at him, I worry that JTIII may be taking the losses too personally. He wants to win, I believe that. Looking at our teams of recent vintage, it seems to me like we don't take over games in close games in crunch time, especially against good competition. Someone else can pull the stats, but we have had a very bad record in close games now for several years. In some ways, I think that creates a false sense of how close we are. As some folks point out, it often feels like, with a bounce here or a lucky call there, it's a different outcome. But the truth is, it's actually more than that. For example, I watched the Butler game today. They played terribly for about 25 minutes, couldn't make a shot and couldn't defend. But they didn't panic, focused, and absolutely owned Marquette down the stretch. Both Butler and Xavier did the same thing against us. I don't think that Butler at least is a lot more talented than we are (Xavier probably is at least a bit better), but I think with our talent we should be able to get by both teams at home, and we just didn't. That's what I mean by a winning attitude; it's a look down the stretch that we don't have. I also don't think we have a clear identity in terms of execution. We don't play a stifling, tone-setting defense like Virginia or West Virginia. We don't have a particularly distinct defensive style like Syracuse. We don't run a prolific, guard-centric offense like Creighton. I point out these teams because, going into a game and often a season, they know exactly what they're going to try to do to beat you, and they are going to force them to stop you. Georgetown doesn't have any real sort of identity to me. It used to be exhilarating, incredible, stifling defense. Then they changed the rules. At the beginning of the JTIII tenure, it was a prolific, cerebral Princeton offense. That 2007 team was incredible. Then, it was stifling defense. Now, I just don't know. The extent to which JTIII is working on the things I mention I just don't know. And sorry for a rather long-winded response to a good and fair question. Also, don't take this as saying I don't want JTIII to succeed. The best thing for this school, by far, is a winning team with JTIII at the helm and big John off to the side. It's a great connection to the past. I just wish I saw more of an identity on the court, more development to build a consistent plan, and a team mentality in key moments that owns the moment. Saturday was a good start. Hope they do it again tonight. |
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,911
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Jan 16, 2017 20:41:24 GMT -5
What exactly is a winning culture? This is a bigger issue than one team. There are 29 sports and over 700 student athletes at Georgetown and 14 play men's basketball. Unless you're following soccer, what does it say about the culture at Georgetown when so many of its team are below the curve and there is no expectation of championship success? Many men's team sports are not competitive for conference championships, much less NCAA honors. Men's lacrosse had its worst season since 1982, football has one winning season since 2000, and baseball has not finished above .500 since 1986. And this is accepted. Women's teams are not far behind, as evidenced by recent records in field hockey (5-13), volleyball (7-24) and softball (9-35) may attest. You can't turn on and turn off a winning culture at a university. |
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jan 16, 2017 20:47:28 GMT -5
What exactly is a winning culture? Do you mean we just need to win games? I think it's clear that JT3 and staff are certainly trying to do that - even if they haven't been succeeding as much as we'd (and they) like. To me, we just need to play better and, where feasible, develop skills to aid in improvement. Especially after the Connecticut game, I don't see how anybody could question the players' or staff's effort (this isn't aimed at you bamahoya11, but others have repeatedly said that our guys don't play with enough effort). Clearly, they are pouring a lot into the games and trying hard. But that doesn't mean they'll win. I like the question, and to the extent that I could be construed to suggest otherwise, I think the staff is spending a ton of time trying to get this right. Looking at him, I worry that JTIII may be taking the losses too personally. He wants to win, I believe that. Looking at our teams of recent vintage, it seems to me like we don't take over games in close games in crunch time, especially against good competition. Someone else can pull the stats, but we have had a very bad record in close games now for several years. In some ways, I think that creates a false sense of how close we are. As some folks point out, it often feels like, with a bounce here or a lucky call there, it's a different outcome. But the truth is, it's actually more than that. For example, I watched the Butler game today. They played terribly for about 25 minutes, couldn't make a shot and couldn't defend. But they didn't panic, focused, and absolutely owned Marquette down the stretch. Both Butler and Xavier did the same thing against us. I don't think that Butler at least is a lot more talented than we are (Xavier probably is at least a bit better), but I think with our talent we should be able to get by both teams at home, and we just didn't. That's what I mean by a winning attitude; it's a look down the stretch that we don't have. I also don't think we have a clear identity in terms of execution. We don't play a stifling, tone-setting defense like Virginia or West Virginia. We don't have a particularly distinct defensive style like Syracuse. We don't run a prolific, guard-centric offense like Creighton. I point out these teams because, going into a game and often a season, they know exactly what they're going to try to do to beat you, and they are going to force them to stop you. Georgetown doesn't have any real sort of identity to me. It used to be exhilarating, incredible, stifling defense. Then they changed the rules. At the beginning of the JTIII tenure, it was a prolific, cerebral Princeton offense. That 2007 team was incredible. Then, it was stifling defense. Now, I just don't know. The extent to which JTIII is working on the things I mention I just don't know. And sorry for a rather long-winded response to a good and fair question. Also, don't take this as saying I don't want JTIII to succeed. The best thing for this school, by far, is a winning team with JTIII at the helm and big John off to the side. It's a great connection to the past. I just wish I saw more of an identity on the court, more development to build a consistent plan, and a team mentality in key moments that owns the moment. Saturday was a good start. Hope they do it again tonight. Interesting thoughts. The part I bolded above, I think is absolutely true. I don't think Georgetown has an identity in the sense of a "theme" of sorts. As you noted, in the 2007 era it was clearly the Princeton offense, etc, and that clearly lingers to today, even if we aren't running nearly as much Princeton offense as we did back then. I think the most important thing is that the coach needs to know what he wants to do on the court so that he can recruit accordingly. For example, Waters is a point guard unlike many of JT3's guard recruits. If he wants to use Waters to try to go in a more guard-centric direction, I think that would be fair (and fans would probably be pleased). Here's the thing, though. If you have very good or great players, it doesn't really matter what system you're running because it's going to succeed. But, I do think having an identity is something that is useful. |
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,665
|
Post by guru on Jan 16, 2017 21:18:58 GMT -5
I like the question, and to the extent that I could be construed to suggest otherwise, I think the staff is spending a ton of time trying to get this right. Looking at him, I worry that JTIII may be taking the losses too personally. He wants to win, I believe that. Looking at our teams of recent vintage, it seems to me like we don't take over games in close games in crunch time, especially against good competition. Someone else can pull the stats, but we have had a very bad record in close games now for several years. In some ways, I think that creates a false sense of how close we are. As some folks point out, it often feels like, with a bounce here or a lucky call there, it's a different outcome. But the truth is, it's actually more than that. For example, I watched the Butler game today. They played terribly for about 25 minutes, couldn't make a shot and couldn't defend. But they didn't panic, focused, and absolutely owned Marquette down the stretch. Both Butler and Xavier did the same thing against us. I don't think that Butler at least is a lot more talented than we are (Xavier probably is at least a bit better), but I think with our talent we should be able to get by both teams at home, and we just didn't. That's what I mean by a winning attitude; it's a look down the stretch that we don't have. I also don't think we have a clear identity in terms of execution. We don't play a stifling, tone-setting defense like Virginia or West Virginia. We don't have a particularly distinct defensive style like Syracuse. We don't run a prolific, guard-centric offense like Creighton. I point out these teams because, going into a game and often a season, they know exactly what they're going to try to do to beat you, and they are going to force them to stop you. Georgetown doesn't have any real sort of identity to me. It used to be exhilarating, incredible, stifling defense. Then they changed the rules. At the beginning of the JTIII tenure, it was a prolific, cerebral Princeton offense. That 2007 team was incredible. Then, it was stifling defense. Now, I just don't know. The extent to which JTIII is working on the things I mention I just don't know. And sorry for a rather long-winded response to a good and fair question. Also, don't take this as saying I don't want JTIII to succeed. The best thing for this school, by far, is a winning team with JTIII at the helm and big John off to the side. It's a great connection to the past. I just wish I saw more of an identity on the court, more development to build a consistent plan, and a team mentality in key moments that owns the moment. Saturday was a good start. Hope they do it again tonight. Interesting thoughts. The part I bolded above, I think is absolutely true. I don't think Georgetown has an identity in the sense of a "theme" of sorts. As you noted, in the 2007 era it was clearly the Princeton offense, etc, and that clearly lingers to today, even if we aren't running nearly as much Princeton offense as we did back then. I think the most important thing is that the coach needs to know what he wants to do on the court so that he can recruit accordingly. For example, Waters is a point guard unlike many of JT3's guard recruits. If he wants to use Waters to try to go in a more guard-centric direction, I think that would be fair (and fans would probably be pleased). Here's the thing, though. If you have very good or great players, it doesn't really matter what system you're running because it's going to succeed. But, I do think having an identity is something that is useful. We have good players. Maybe not great players, but several good and a few very good players. Were they being coached correctly, were they being placed in situations and schemes were they could best use their talents, they would have a better record than 10-8. Hand this roster to a good coach and they're a fringe top 25 team right now, and certainly on pace for an NCAA bid. |
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 16, 2017 22:37:31 GMT -5
Interesting thoughts. The part I bolded above, I think is absolutely true. I don't think Georgetown has an identity in the sense of a "theme" of sorts. As you noted, in the 2007 era it was clearly the Princeton offense, etc, and that clearly lingers to today, even if we aren't running nearly as much Princeton offense as we did back then. I think the most important thing is that the coach needs to know what he wants to do on the court so that he can recruit accordingly. For example, Waters is a point guard unlike many of JT3's guard recruits. If he wants to use Waters to try to go in a more guard-centric direction, I think that would be fair (and fans would probably be pleased). Here's the thing, though. If you have very good or great players, it doesn't really matter what system you're running because it's going to succeed. But, I do think having an identity is something that is useful. We have good players. Maybe not great players, but several good and a few very good players. Were they being coached correctly, were they being placed in situations and schemes were they could best use their talents, they would have a better record than 10-8. Hand this roster to a good coach and they're a fringe top 25 team right now, and certainly on pace for an NCAA bid. We have a team full of mediocre talent, with only a couple of exceptions. Yeah we could be a little better, but these players as a group have a pretty low ceiling. And it is not the NCAA tourney. |
|
|
|
Post by augustusfinknottle on Jan 16, 2017 22:42:42 GMT -5
Enough already.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,422
|
Post by the_way on Jan 16, 2017 22:45:33 GMT -5
You are only as good as your talent.
Look at other Big East teams and then look at us.
It is like night and day.
III is getting the most out of his talent. It just isn't much there right now.
Applaud the guys for giving the effort. They are trying. Good teams just seem to be one step ahead of us in many ways.
|
|
|
|
Post by Problem of Dog on Jan 16, 2017 22:48:39 GMT -5
If JTIII really felt any sense of urgency, we'd be recruiting at a much higher level.
|
|
95hoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,309
|
Post by 95hoya on Jan 16, 2017 22:49:22 GMT -5
Yeah these teams all have more talent. It's really that simple. Could 3 get more out of this roster? Sure. But no way is it a top 25 roster. So many players with limited skillsets.
|
|
AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,130
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Jan 16, 2017 22:51:06 GMT -5
www.providencejournal.com/sports/20170115/pc-gunning-for-another-sweep-of-georgetown...apt words for this thread from someone who knows the job. [/quote I may not know what it is to recruit, mentor, advise and coach student/BB athletes but I do know that if I am not successful in my current job I am fired or "encouraged" to resign. Furthermore if only the coach knows then is the coach or his Dad the only one who can terminate the employment? |
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,422
|
Post by the_way on Jan 16, 2017 22:54:30 GMT -5
If JTIII really felt any sense of urgency, we'd be recruiting at a much higher level. He is well aware of the problem (I hope?). However, bad recruiting has a way of rearing its ugly head. You can't undo it during the season. What we need, can't be fixed with one recruiting class, unless you recruit like Duke or Kansas or Kentucky. You need to recruit/build your roster/program like the good teams in our conference. |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,605
Member is Online
|
Post by prhoya on Jan 16, 2017 22:57:13 GMT -5
If JTIII really felt any sense of urgency, we'd be recruiting at a much higher level. He is well aware of the problem (I hope?). However, bad recruiting has a way of rearing its ugly head. You can't undo it during the season. What we need, can't be fixed with one recruiting class, unless you recruit like Duke or Kansas or Kentucky. You need to recruit/build your roster/program like the good teams in our conference. And have a plan on how you want to play before starting to recruit. |
|
AltoSaxa
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,130
|
Post by AltoSaxa on Jan 16, 2017 23:00:14 GMT -5
This is true. Who is responsible for the recruiting for the past 10+ years?
|
|
|
|
Post by hoyamonarch on Jan 16, 2017 23:08:16 GMT -5
We have some talent. Anyone really think Providence has more talent?
Something has to change, this isnt just 1 off year.
|
|
smokeyjack
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,313
|
Post by smokeyjack on Jan 16, 2017 23:08:37 GMT -5
You are only as good as your talent. Look at other Big East teams and then look at us. It is like night and day. III is getting the most out of his talent. It just isn't much there right now. Applaud the guys for giving the effort. They are trying. Good teams just seem to be one step ahead of us in many ways. You can't be serious. We have 3-4 NBA level players on our roster. I'd say we're 3rd in BE relative to talent. Even a marginal coach would have this bunch on the fringe of the T25, much less in the conference cellar. No sane person could argue that JT3 is getting the most out of this group. Hate to say it, but it's now pathetic to watch. It's hard to watch anyone fail so utterly and so publicly. |
|
|
|
Post by FHillsNYHoya on Jan 16, 2017 23:09:05 GMT -5
Its time.
|
|
bamahoya11
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,831
|
Post by bamahoya11 on Jan 16, 2017 23:10:15 GMT -5
We have good players. Maybe not great players, but several good and a few very good players. Were they being coached correctly, were they being placed in situations and schemes were they could best use their talents, they would have a better record than 10-8. Hand this roster to a good coach and they're a fringe top 25 team right now, and certainly on pace for an NCAA bid. We have a team full of mediocre talent, with only a couple of exceptions. Yeah we could be a little better, but these players as a group have a pretty low ceiling. And it is not the NCAA tourney. I just don't see the talent disparity. Is this team full of elite talent? No. But to me they seem about like where they were picked to finish the league in the preseason--about fifth or sixth--in terms of talent. In this Big East, that's enough to be in the NIT and to be in season long competition for an NCAA bid. Peak and Pryor all all-conference level players. Not every team has one legit star, much less two. Govan is a versatile center who would benefit from further development but is naturally a fit for today's game. Mosely is a talented, raw young player. And Kaleb, Akoy, Bradley, and Mulmore are role players. Again, are we Villanova? Not close. But to me we have the talent to scrap and be solidly above 500. Indeed, JTIII said as such before the year at his open practice for the fans. We are under performing. |
|
