hoyarad
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 521
|
Post by hoyarad on Jan 23, 2017 8:34:34 GMT -5
Weren't we a preseason consensus pick for 4th in the BIg East? Were they all wrong about our talent level or could it be something else? The talent level is there but you need a coach who can fit the pieces together. Is this an elite bunch, no but it is not the last place team in the BE bad. I would guarantee that you take a better coach in our conference and ask them to switch rosters with ours they would school our coach with his own team. I think it would be interesting to see how a different coach in the Big East would use our players. |
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Jan 23, 2017 9:09:00 GMT -5
Didn't hustle on D, didn't rebound, players constantly out of position. At some point, this goes back to the coach. Year after year of the same stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lethal_Interjection on Jan 23, 2017 9:15:35 GMT -5
The specter of DePaul doesn't scare me anymore. DePaul was bad, they fired a coach, and they're still bad. We are bad, and unless something changes (JTIII figures it out, new coach) we will be bad. We have to make some sort of change, whatever we decide to do, or we will reap the same results. The 1st step is usually the hardest to make in moving forward, one has to ask themselves, when is it time to move on and look elsewhere. |
|
KHoyaNYC
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,902 
|
Post by KHoyaNYC on Jan 23, 2017 9:24:31 GMT -5
Didn't hustle on D, didn't rebound, players constantly out of position. At some point, this goes back to the coach. Year after year of the same stuff. It's the year after year part that makes his continued tenure difficult to justify. You could also throw in the play calling out of timeouts. Chronically bad. |
|
hoyarad
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 521
|
Post by hoyarad on Jan 23, 2017 9:27:40 GMT -5
Definitely poor time out play calling the last few years...but not in the more distant past. What's changed?
|
|
|
|
Post by gogu75 on Jan 23, 2017 9:35:53 GMT -5
It really comes down to the number of mulligans that JT III will receive from the GU administration. Some people on this board believe that he has "earned" an unlimited
number of mulligans, while others feel that he had already exhausted his "earned" supply of mulligans several seasons ago. Other than speculating on when the GU administration
might decide to act, one really has to wonder about the other side of the contractual relationship, which is JT III himself. He is obviously not unaware of the team's lack of success, but so far has not really commented on it in regard to his own coaching situation (unlike Alford last year at UCLA) or even publicly taken primary personal responsibility for the downward spiral of GU basketball. How much longer will he continue to ignore the big elephant in the room?
|
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Jan 23, 2017 9:51:43 GMT -5
I think he gets one more awful year. If he starts to get a shift in recruiting and on-court results (even a small uptick) then I think it buys him time. I just hope the school is looking at this from a business standpoint and then his contract is incentive laden so as to minimize the cost to the university. Nobody gets paid for crappy product and right now we have a crappy product.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Jan 23, 2017 9:56:55 GMT -5
I pray that GU is not thinking about its basketball program from a business perspective...it is at that point that we become like everyone else, and I hope that never happens. I am okay with taking some hits to the jaw to accomplish that objective.
|
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,422
|
Post by the_way on Jan 23, 2017 10:02:30 GMT -5
Easy looks, not just open looks. Shots you create through your own offense by way of a facilitator (or two or three), not the defense laying off guys who serve no threat to score from beyond the arc. Xavier's guards give them better looks. It forces the opposing defense's hand. It is why you see such a huge foul disparity. They have facilitators. We don't. We literally bring the ball up, toss it around, and hope someone (most likely Peak or Pryor) gets open.Today isn't the day to make this argument, the team had 22 assists on 28 made fg's.. We had 20 asists on 28 fg's made the last time we played them. Shot at least 50% too. And who took the majority of the shots? Peak and Pryor. When you have a well-run offense,it is not just the assists. That doesn't tell the whole story. They have guys who can disrupt a defense. We don't. That is also part of the facilitator's job. They had 49 FT attempts vs our 14 FT attempts. Similar thing happened in the 1st game we played them. Their 38 FT attempts vs. 23 FT attempts. We couldn't handle their offensive execution. Especially in crunch time. That is part of the reason why in the 2nd half they were able to pull away with the victory. |
|
|
|
Post by ColumbiaHeightsHoya on Jan 23, 2017 10:10:17 GMT -5
I pray that GU is not thinking about its basketball program from a business perspective...it is at that point that we become like everyone else, and I hope that never happens. I am okay with taking some hits to the jaw to accomplish that objective. Contracts with coaches, teachers, faculty, etc. should all be done with an eye towards results. If results aren't delivered, then contracts can be renegotiated with an eye toward the bottom line of improving results back to an acceptable level. I hear your sentiment but I think we are talking a bit of apples & oranges here. Programs can win without sacrificing their jesuit identity. Just look at Creighton, Nova, Gonzaga for examples. |
|
the_way
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
The Illest
Posts: 5,422
|
Post by the_way on Jan 23, 2017 10:10:28 GMT -5
The only comparison with DePaul is the Father-Son angle. III has had success here. He was in the NCAA tournament two years ago. 4 out of the last 6 years (7 years with the way things our shaping up this year).
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,927
|
Post by NCHoya on Jan 23, 2017 10:14:10 GMT -5
Please do not make this complicated, yesterday's loss came down to not rebounding (Offensive rebounds - 1 vs 11) and fouling too often (34 vs 17) because we are not good at defense.
We can discuss the offensive limitations of the team all day long, but the fact is when your leading scorer shoots 10-12 from the field and you shoot 54% as a team and 40% from three; you should not lose by double digits.
III cannot teach defense in this new age of college basketball. His players still foul too often and give up rebounds and open looks. I feel bad for the players because their teammates are not being held accountable in practice or the games, and as a result, we watch putrid and undisciplined defense that loses them games over and over again.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2017 10:32:25 GMT -5
I realize everybody had foul issues last night, but our PGs (Jagan/Mulmore) getting 8 fouls in 40 minutes is unacceptable. They continue to kill us in that department.
Jagan (4.9 fouls per 40min) is fouling at the same rate as Bradley.
Mulmore (5.4) at the same rate as Jessie.
I know some of this is going to fall on them at the end of games when we're behind, but not to that extent. Even Markel and DSR on their worst team were still in the 2.5 range.
If we're not getting any steals or creating turnovers anyway (last in BE in each), why the heck are our guards fouling so much? Experience helps, but JT3 has to get these two to knock it off.
|
|
deacon
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,850
|
Post by deacon on Jan 23, 2017 10:34:08 GMT -5
It really comes down to the number of mulligans that JT III will receive from the GU administration. Some people on this board believe that he has "earned" an unlimited number of mulligans, while others feel that he had already exhausted his "earned" supply of mulligans several seasons ago. Other than speculating on when the GU administration might decide to act, one really has to wonder about the other side of the contractual relationship, which is JT III himself. He is obviously not unaware of the team's lack of success, but so far has not really commented on it in regard to his own coaching situation (unlike Alford last year at UCLA) or even publicly taken primary personal responsibility for the downward spiral of GU basketball. How much longer will he continue to ignore the big elephant in the room? He can ignore it because he isn't asked about it by local reporters. It's weird because even if I was still in the business I would have some slight trepidation about it because of my own relationship with Big John and not wanting to burn that bridge but it seems as if everyone who covers the team is hesitant to ask him in public if he is in fact worried about his job security for one reason or another. |
|
hoyarad
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 521
|
Post by hoyarad on Jan 23, 2017 10:40:15 GMT -5
Agreed. I think the media has been so walled off that now they don't care to cover the Hoyas - when times are bad there are no questions and no answers. We were only a little more open during our good years.
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,404
|
Post by calhoya on Jan 23, 2017 11:09:54 GMT -5
I pray that GU is not thinking about its basketball program from a business perspective...it is at that point that we become like everyone else, and I hope that never happens. I am okay with taking some hits to the jaw to accomplish that objective. You do accept that the basketball program is a business, I hope, even if the Administration does not analyze the coach from a business perspective. The decision to join the new Big East was a business decision. The salary given to the coach was a business decision. The program is marketed like a business. I agree with you that Georgetown should not be like all of the other programs that do not value education of the athletes and doing things the right way. However, none of that changes the fact that the Hoyas are running a basketball business. If they want it to be different the Ivy League provides the model. I know that none of the Ivy League coaches are paid anywhere near what the Hoyas spend. |
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Jan 23, 2017 11:25:10 GMT -5
I think the Hoyas can continue to follow Ivy League ideals and compete in the Big East, and I will continue to feel that way unless and until I see a real pattern- i.e., five years or more- to prove otherwise. The Hoyas have done so for decades and have been lauded in many circles for that. Suddenly, they experience two (not ten) losing seasons, and the philosophy must be abandoned? With all due respect I do not buy that and I hope that they stick with the traditional model of Georgetown basketball.
|
|
hoyarad
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 521
|
Post by hoyarad on Jan 23, 2017 11:26:44 GMT -5
What about the rest of Hoya sports? Not a great track record in many sports...especially lately. Just accept it, right?
|
|
bigskyhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,103
|
Post by bigskyhoya on Jan 23, 2017 11:46:52 GMT -5
I pray that GU is not thinking about its basketball program from a business perspective...it is at that point that we become like everyone else, and I hope that never happens. I am okay with taking some hits to the jaw to accomplish that objective. Were you opposed to recruiting Iverson and Whittington, among others, because we stepped outside the Ivy League model? |
|
|
|
Post by hoyalove4ever on Jan 23, 2017 12:02:03 GMT -5
I do not think there was anything about those recruitments that went outside the GU model, which may have Ivy League ideals, but is its own distinct model.
You can recruit good players who are not boy scouts necessarily without making the program a "win-first / must-win/ cost-benefit" endeavor. It is fine to recruit student athletes with troubled backgrounds or poor academics; as long as they qualify, and are held to legitimate academic and other standards, there is nothing wrong with that. What I am talking about is avoidance of the basketball factories that most other programs, even from fine academic schools, seem to have developed. GU needs to avoid that at all costs. One cost may be a few losing seasons in a row. While that is disappointing, I am accepting of that as part of the costs for running a program the right way.
|
|
