jpj
Bulldog (over 250 posts)
Posts: 296
|
Post by jpj on Nov 21, 2024 19:25:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Nov 22, 2024 12:27:44 GMT -5
From press release they are looking to have somebody in place by end school year '26. If they stick to that timetable nothing will happen for a while. If it's somebody who is an outsider, with experience at a another major univ, I would suspect the program is seriously reevaluated, which could be good or bad, hard to say. If an insider or Jesuit with limited large univ exp would not expect much change. Really just a guess.
|
|
coach98
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 173 
|
Post by coach98 on Nov 22, 2024 14:27:07 GMT -5
The most reliable answer to most of life's questions is "depends." The second most common answer is "money." This situation is no different. As I see it, it all boils down to if the next person buys the idea that athletics is the front porch of the university and wants to continue to dedicate massive resources to reviving the program. That said, here are the biggest factors I see.
Uncertainty in Leadership Priorities
A new interim or permanent president might not prioritize athletics, potentially shifting focus away from basketball. This could create precariousness in the program's long-term support.
If the new leadership adopts a different vision for basketball, there could be misalignment between the board, head coach, and AD, causing disruptions(resignations and firings).
Athletic Director's Role
Lee Reed might feel increased pressure to assert leadership. His record supervising the other sports is exceptional. This could result in more micromanagement or changes in the program’s direction. Lee and Jack were reluctant to hop aboard the NIL train. It took them three years to get over their trepidation and tiptoe into the waters. My hope going forward is that he fully embraces NIL, rather than dismissively tolerating it. He'll also have to deal with the House settlement. As a Georgetown fan, the school's sad devotion to a bygone era of student athletics never made sense. It was delusional and self-destructive. Reed has a chance to distinguish himself as a competent, adaptable visionary.
Recruiting Impact
Recruits and their families often value institutional stability. Questions about Georgetown's commitment to the basketball program during a leadership transition could deter top prospects. Competitor programs could exploit the instability to sway recruits. If instability persists long-term, it could create a perception problem for the program. Prospective recruits might question the university's commitment to athletics, affecting the talent pipeline for years.
.
Funding Challenges
The basketball program’s financial needs—scholarships, facilities, and operational budgets—might take a hit if the new leadership prioritizes other university areas.
Donors and alumni may hesitate to contribute to athletics amid leadership uncertainty, particularly if they were close to DeGioia.
Ed’s Future
EC is Jack’s hire. New leadership might have less loyalty to him. Even a successful rebuilding effort could be cut short if leadership changes course. Cooley might face reduced autonomy, with increased scrutiny or involvement from a new president or the board of trustees.
Fan and Alumni Engagement
Prolonged uncertainty might alienate parts of the fan base and alumni, reducing attendance, merchandise sales, and overall program support. Alternatively, a galvanizing effort by passionate alumni to support the team through adversity could strengthen engagement—this would depend on how the situation is communicated and managed.
Strategic Decisions
If the Big East’s leadership senses instability or incompetence, it could impact Georgetown's influence in conference-level decisions or negotiations.
Opportunities in the uncertainty?
Not all outcomes need to be negative. Strategic and proactive communication by the athletic department and the basketball coach could mitigate some of the fallout. For instance, Cooley or Reed could position the program as a stabilizing force during the transition, signaling to recruits and fans that basketball remains a university priority. Georgetown might encourage alumni and fans to rally around the program to maintain momentum during this transitional period.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Nov 22, 2024 18:21:35 GMT -5
The most reliable answer to most of life's questions is "depends." The second most common answer is "money." This situation is no different. As I see it, it all boils down to if the next person buys the idea that athletics is the front porch of the university and wants to continue to dedicate massive resources to reviving the program. That said, here are the biggest factors I see. Uncertainty in Leadership PrioritiesA new interim or permanent president might not prioritize athletics, potentially shifting focus away from basketball. This could create precariousness in the program's long-term support. If the new leadership adopts a different vision for basketball, there could be misalignment between the board, head coach, and AD, causing disruptions(resignations and firings). Athletic Director's RoleLee Reed might feel increased pressure to assert leadership. His record supervising the other sports is exceptional. This could result in more micromanagement or changes in the program’s direction. Lee and Jak were reluctant to hop aboard the NIL train. It took them three years to get over their trepidation and tiptoe into the waters. My hope going forward is that he fully embraces NIL, rather than dismissively tolerating it. He'll also have to deal with the House settlement. As a Georgetown fan, the school's sad devotion to a bygone era of student athletics never made sense. It was delusional and self-destructive. Reed has a chance to distinguish himself as a competent, adaptable visionary. Recruiting ImpactRecruits and their families often value institutional stability. Questions about Georgetown's commitment to the basketball program during a leadership transition could deter top prospects. Competitor programs could exploit the instability to sway recruits. If instability persists long-term, it could create a perception problem for the program. Prospective recruits might question the university's commitment to athletics, affecting the talent pipeline for years. . Funding ChallengesThe basketball program’s financial needs—scholarships, facilities, and operational budgets—might take a hit if the new leadership prioritizes other university areas. Donors and alumni may hesitate to contribute to athletics amid leadership uncertainty, particularly if they were close to DeGioia. Ed’s FutureEC is Jack’s hire. New leadership might have less loyalty to him. Even a successful rebuilding effort could be cut short if leadership changes course. Cooley might face reduced autonomy, with increased scrutiny or involvement from a new president or the board of trustees. Fan and Alumni EngagementProlonged uncertainty might alienate parts of the fan base and alumni, reducing attendance, merchandise sales, and overall program support. Alternatively, a galvanizing effort by passionate alumni to support the team through adversity could strengthen engagement—this would depend on how the situation is communicated and managed. Strategic DecisionsIf the Big East’s leadership senses instability or incompetence, it could impact Georgetown's influence in conference-level decisions or negotiations. Opportunities in the uncertainty?
Not all outcomes need to be negative. Strategic and proactive communication by the athletic department and the basketball coach could mitigate some of the fallout. For instance, Cooley or Reed could position the program as a stabilizing force during the transition, signaling to recruits and fans that basketball remains a university priority. Georgetown might encourage alumni and fans to rally around the program to maintain momentum during this transitional period. All interesting points. As far as Ed Cooley's future, one could easily see it going the other way, too. A new President may be okay with spending money on basketball but not really care what is going on, and give Cooley even more autonomy than he already has. Or maybe Lee Reed will be given more freedom and actually have a bigger role in basketball than he has in the past. One thing I would say is do not expect any major changes before the end of 2026 at Georgetown in any respect. My guess is that things will remain largely status quo until new leadership is in place unless the interim President has a big personality and cares about basketball a lot--which is doubtful. |
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,637
|
Post by prhoya on Nov 22, 2024 23:10:37 GMT -5
The most reliable answer to most of life's questions is "depends." The second most common answer is "money." This situation is no different. As I see it, it all boils down to if the next person buys the idea that athletics is the front porch of the university and wants to continue to dedicate massive resources to reviving the program. That said, here are the biggest factors I see. Uncertainty in Leadership PrioritiesA new interim or permanent president might not prioritize athletics, potentially shifting focus away from basketball. This could create precariousness in the program's long-term support. If the new leadership adopts a different vision for basketball, there could be misalignment between the board, head coach, and AD, causing disruptions(resignations and firings). Athletic Director's RoleLee Reed might feel increased pressure to assert leadership. His record supervising the other sports is exceptional. This could result in more micromanagement or changes in the program’s direction. Lee and Jak were reluctant to hop aboard the NIL train. It took them three years to get over their trepidation and tiptoe into the waters. My hope going forward is that he fully embraces NIL, rather than dismissively tolerating it. He'll also have to deal with the House settlement. As a Georgetown fan, the school's sad devotion to a bygone era of student athletics never made sense. It was delusional and self-destructive. Reed has a chance to distinguish himself as a competent, adaptable visionary. Recruiting ImpactRecruits and their families often value institutional stability. Questions about Georgetown's commitment to the basketball program during a leadership transition could deter top prospects. Competitor programs could exploit the instability to sway recruits. If instability persists long-term, it could create a perception problem for the program. Prospective recruits might question the university's commitment to athletics, affecting the talent pipeline for years. . Funding ChallengesThe basketball program’s financial needs—scholarships, facilities, and operational budgets—might take a hit if the new leadership prioritizes other university areas. Donors and alumni may hesitate to contribute to athletics amid leadership uncertainty, particularly if they were close to DeGioia. Ed’s FutureEC is Jack’s hire. New leadership might have less loyalty to him. Even a successful rebuilding effort could be cut short if leadership changes course. Cooley might face reduced autonomy, with increased scrutiny or involvement from a new president or the board of trustees. Fan and Alumni EngagementProlonged uncertainty might alienate parts of the fan base and alumni, reducing attendance, merchandise sales, and overall program support. Alternatively, a galvanizing effort by passionate alumni to support the team through adversity could strengthen engagement—this would depend on how the situation is communicated and managed. Strategic DecisionsIf the Big East’s leadership senses instability or incompetence, it could impact Georgetown's influence in conference-level decisions or negotiations. Opportunities in the uncertainty?
Not all outcomes need to be negative. Strategic and proactive communication by the athletic department and the basketball coach could mitigate some of the fallout. For instance, Cooley or Reed could position the program as a stabilizing force during the transition, signaling to recruits and fans that basketball remains a university priority. Georgetown might encourage alumni and fans to rally around the program to maintain momentum during this transitional period. All interesting points. As far as Ed Cooley's future, one could easily see it going the other way, too. A new President may be okay with spending money on basketball but not really care what is going on, and give Cooley even more autonomy than he already has. Or maybe Lee Reed will be given more freedom and actually have a bigger role in basketball than he has in the past. One thing I would say is do not expect any major changes before the end of 2026 at Georgetown in any respect. My guess is that things will remain largely status quo until new leadership is in place unless the interim President has a big personality and cares about basketball a lot--which is doubtful. So you’re saying anything can happen… |
|
|
|
Post by hoya1323 on Nov 23, 2024 8:06:01 GMT -5
Georgetown Basketball: 2031 Patriot League Champions.
|
|
Elvado
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,774
Member is Online
|
Post by Elvado on Nov 23, 2024 8:37:28 GMT -5
Georgetown Basketball: 2031 Patriot League Champions. Would we even win it? |
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Nov 23, 2024 10:53:55 GMT -5
We have not been good enough to win the Ivy in a long time--maybe we could this year but would not bet a lot on it. Obviously, given the amt of resources spent on the program this is a major institutional issue.
I suspect how the team does this/next year will say a lot. If we don't make a major step up by next year, would think Cooley would be on hot seat with any new admin.
|
|
coach98
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 173
|
Post by coach98 on Nov 24, 2024 11:27:21 GMT -5
All interesting points. As far as Ed Cooley's future, one could easily see it going the other way, too. A new President may be okay with spending money on basketball but not really care what is going on, and give Cooley even more autonomy than he already has. Or maybe Lee Reed will be given more freedom and actually have a bigger role in basketball than he has in the past. One thing I would say is do not expect any major changes before the end of 2026 at Georgetown in any respect. My guess is that things will remain largely status quo until new leadership is in place unless the interim President has a big personality and cares about basketball a lot--which is doubtful. So you’re saying anything can happen… I'll give my best guess as to what will happen. None of this is based on insider knowledge. The big winner is Lee Reed. 🥳 There will be increased reliance on Reed, potentially altering the balance of power and decision-making dynamics. I have no idea what his relationship with Cooley is, but Ed no longer has the most powerful ally in the university. Lee will have more direct control of the program. Interim president Robert Groves has bigger fish to fry, so it would make sense he'd defer to Reed on basketball. I agree that no big changes will be made until 2026 or whenever they find a replacement. In 2026, Ed will be either ending year the third season or beginning the fourth of his six-year deal. Being a tournament team by year four is a reasonable expectation, especially given what's happening at St. John's. If Ed hasn't been able to do that, then he's probably sent packing. I have no idea what the buyout is, but it couldn't be more than 50% of the remaining money. So what's different? If Ed had a bad year four, I think he could have talked Jack into another year. I doubt a new guy would be as interested in Ed's case for continued employment. Nothing would show you were in control more as a new university president than firing the mediocre coach of your high-profile basketball program. |
|
jwp91
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,425
|
Post by jwp91 on Nov 24, 2024 13:58:10 GMT -5
My speculation is that even if the new President is not a huge fan of basketball, he/she will likely respect the role that basketball has played in Georgetown's history. I wouldn't expect any boat rocking. I do expect Reed will gain influence. I also speculate that Cooley will have less leash than he would have otherwise had.
|
|
