|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 28, 2023 8:26:54 GMT -5
Cooley's answer on how good we are going to be is refreshingly honest--basically he doesn't know. That isn't surprising, as he essentially has an entirely new group. Interesting that he is high on Styles, though. Cooley has had a good track record recently with transfers, hopefully that continues.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 26, 2023 19:29:53 GMT -5
I like Heath, yet I cannot forget him having serious issues handling the ball when Primo was out of the game or not going coast to coast. He’s no PG and maybe not even a competent backup PG imo. If Rowan can handle and dish, his playing time is not threatened by Heath. Maybe Epps, but I haven’t seen enough of him. Heath is a good shooter from deep, who will have a substantial role on this team, and will benefit from ball movement and some drive and kicks. I never thought Heath was chucking last year, even when shots for anyone but Brandon and Primo were scarce. I hope he has a great year and hits some big shots for us. Heath was a really bad ball handler and essentially cannot play PG if there is any pressure whatsoever. If the other team lays off, I think he'd be fine, but any sort of even token pressure and Heath simply cannot be the primary handler. Spears had a lot of weaknesses and got me frustrated with his style of play which always yielded horrible long two point jumpers, but I understand why Ewing played him a lot as PG. Nobody else could handle the ball.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 26, 2023 19:27:53 GMT -5
"College Coaches Confidential: "Which college coaches are best in game?"... A Coach in the ACC: Rick Pitino (St. John’s) is the best X’s and O’s coach I’ve gone up against—maybe the best job scouting and preparing for opponents that I’ve seen.”... A Coach in the Big East: “I would have to go with Greg McDermott at Creighton. He’s a terrific offensive coach, which makes them hard to defend. He also does a great job scouting the opponent, taking away your first option and forcing you to find other ways to score.”... A Coach in the Big East: ”Matt Painter (Purdue), Tod Kowalczyk (Toledo), and Greg McDermott (Creighton). They have nice sets that you have to do concepts to guard. While other coaches are easy to prep for, they keep you on your toes. The spacing and counters keep you on edge.”... A Coach in the ACC: “It’s Rick Pitino (St. John’s) and Bill Self (Kansas)" www.on3.com/news/college-coaches-confidential-which-college-coaches-are-best-in-game-rick-pitino-bill-self-matt-painter/I always find polls/anonymous comments like this amusing. You don't need an ACC coach to tell you Rick Pitino or Bill Self as among the best coaches in the game. I would add that McDermott absolutely is a proven great offensive coach, too. But in all seriousness, you don't win and achieve as much success as Pitino or Self without being great at almost every aspect of coaching.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 26, 2023 19:23:30 GMT -5
Just out of boredom after Rothsteins prediction: PG: Epps (20) Brumbaugh (20) SG: Heath (28) Epps (12) SF Styles (25) Bristol (15) PF: Massoud (25) Akok (10) Fielder (5) C: Akok (15) Cook (20) Mutombo (5) You can see the desperate need for another guard in the rotation. One injury away from...Asad getting minutes? This seems reasonable for estimates, but it would also be an oddity for Cooley historically if nobody gets 30 minutes a game. And we know from past experience when Cooley does have excellent players he does lean on them heavily--but we don't seem to have those players, or at least, so far we don't know if we have those types of key cogs in the machine. I would be really surprised if by Big East play there aren't two players, at least, averaging 30. I think much more than that is unlikely, though, unless somebody has a breakout year/turns out to be substantially better than expected. I think there will be a lot of minutes to go around, but I do think there will be some natural sorting eventually, with a smaller set of guys getting a lot of the time. Often times you get unfortunate events, like injuries, that force minutes to go up too. Hopefully everyone will stay healthy, but it's rare to go through an entire season without someone getting injured.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 23, 2023 15:35:26 GMT -5
Heath has the multiple transfer problem that Murray/Spears/Ezewiro also had - unless he's graduated already. It bears repeating that it is exceedingly difficult for any student, much less a scholarship athlete, to graduate in less than four years from Georgetown University. Even with a healthy dose of transfer credits, a student must still put in 60 hours of upper division courses to be degree eligible. This came up earlier this season when someone claimed Ryan Mutombo or Akok Akok could graduate in three years. Does anyone know of any three year graduate from men's basketball, because I do not. Even Hollis Thompson (2009-12), who arrived a semester early and left after three seasons, did not complete his studies. True, but I graduated now 20 years ago, and I knew a bunch of people who graduated in 3 years, or at least in 3.5 years. It does require a lot of AP credits, and I assume that high school students now have access to more AP classes than I did, certainly. But to your point, scholarship atheletes in any sport will have to spend a lot of time on athletics that others do not, so the odds of athletes graduating from Georgetown early are very unlikely. As for Akok, he did do 3 seasons at Connecticut and one at Georgetown, and presumably he did summer classes, so I would not be surprised if he graduated. Whoever the Big 12 school is, I hope they are unsuccessful. I'd really like Akok to stay. This really shows that the college basketball environment is broken. There will, at some point, need to be serious change.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 21, 2023 15:01:27 GMT -5
I know this is a hypothetical, but I know that you know that the difference between Heath and Epps or Brumbaugh is not 3 wins. Heath's best season has been 2 win shares, Epps basically matched that in his freshman year. I doubt the difference between Heath and Hashem Asad is three wins. Three wins is a giant gulf in value. I doubt you could find any players on losing teams with high WS totals... First, "Win Share" is a concept that can be calculated in a number of ways. It's a common stat used in baseball, for example, to try to show the impact of a player, and it can be useful also in comparing players across eras, too. You often see it references in baseball Hall of Fame discussions. Second, there are different ways to calculate win share. See the linked article from Sports Reference: www.sports-reference.com/cbb/about/ws.html Some calculations allow for negative win shares (like Sports Reference), some do not. I am not an expert on win share calculations by any stretch, but win share is directly linked to how many wins a team has. Third, while this is sort of a statement of the obvious, it is impossible to have any win shares if you do not win. Case in point. Chicago State in 2020-2021 only play 9 games, and they won zero. Nobody on the team had a positive win share. This supports what someone else stated, which is that a team with few wins (us last year), simply isn't going to have a lot of win shares. So talking about Heath's win share is kind of silly, as statistically he cannot posssibly have had a very high one. Third, despite my enjoyment of advanced stats, etc. I have actually never focused a ton on the win share stat in basketball even though even though I love (meaningful) stats. So, I decided to take a quick look at some data points: - In the Final Four Year, Roy Hibbert actually had the highest total win share-7.9-to Green's 6.3. For perspective, Macklin's win share that year was 1.2. - In 2007-2008, Hibbert's win share was 6.8. Next closest was Wallace at 4.4. - In our last arguably great regular season in 2012-2013, in which Georgetown went 25-7, Otto Porter's win share was 7.1. The next closest was Markel Starks with 3.9. - Last year, Wahab had the highest win share at 2.1. But, again, you cannot earn much win share if your team doesn't win many games. The year before, the highest win share was 2.6 with Donald Carey. For this reason, using win shares to compare players on different teams isn't a great measure. This is an extreme example, but let's say you put Lebron James on a horrible team that had 0 wins (unlikely for any team with James). He would have 0 win shares. That's an extreme, but in that scenario he'd have 0 win share. The real value of a win share stat is comparing guys on a roster to see their impact. But, it's not terribly useful for saying X player on Team 1 is better than Y player on Team 2. To address what started all this, Heath v. Epps: Jamal Epps at Illinois had a win share of 1.9, and Heath's was 0.9. When you actually look at their efficiency stats, though their efficiency is almost identical on offense. Sticking with Sports Reference, Heath's O rating is 103.1, and D rating is 114.8. Epps' O rating is 102.8 and D rating is 102.3. So they were very similar on offense, and Epps was a much better defensive player. Defensive efficiency is not a great or reliable stat, but if you look at Georgetown's roster generally, Heath was among our worst defensive players. The major caveat is we have no idea how either Epps or Heath will play in a defensive system run by Ed Cooley. That's especially so for Heath, given that Ewing was such a horrendous defensive coach. In the year immediately preceding Georgeown, Heath's defensive efficiency was much better. So we will see. But yes, solely looking at stats (and not actually evaluating them in person), I would say Epps has as good, if not better argument, to play over Heath (including that we could have Epps more years and Heath is in his last year). But not overwhelmingly so. Epps probably has more potential and may be a better defender, but Heath may be the better choice for certain offensive situations and when we need to put up threes. Epps only shot 30.1% from three, compared to Heath's lifetime 38%. I really think they could be complementary players. As I've said, we really need to stop looking at scenarios like this as either/ors. It very well could be the case that Heath is a better option in certain instances (like when we need threes), whereas Epps might be the better choice in other scenarios.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 21, 2023 9:06:46 GMT -5
If the difference between playing Heath higher minutes in Big East play is the difference between a 5-15 record, and an 8-10 record, for example, I would choose the latter, as long as our younger guys get playing time too. This program has had so much losing in recent years, we need to try to win meaningful games and show there's a spark there. I know this is a hypothetical, but I know that you know that the difference between Heath and Epps or Brumbaugh is not 3 wins. Heath's best season has been 2 win shares, Epps basically matched that in his freshman year. I doubt the difference between Heath and Hashem Asad is three wins. Three wins is a giant gulf in value. Yes, I am exhausted from work and was just throwing out a hypothetical, and probably should have said that-- I agree. I really do agree that the young players should get a lot of playing time this year, I just don't think it's an either-or, given that we don't really have many experienced players to begin with, though I do think they have a role.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 21, 2023 8:52:11 GMT -5
While I agree with you in principle (and basically said that on HoyaTalk--that I didn't want anybody involved in our program under Ewing to continue), it's inapt here. She joined Georgetown as the senior associate director of athletics for business & finance and was later promoted to executive senior associate athletics director for business & finance/senior woman administrator in October of 2021. She clearly was not a Ewing or Ronny hire, and she was here long before he was coach. So, your point is not really relevant here. Agree to disagree. The Georgetown way of doing things goes beyond the Ewing Era. I think anyone that is even tangentially familiar with the antiquated ways that the program has operated in since the 70s isn't a person that will help in the future. Again, you are talking about the Georgetown way of doing things in men's basketball. I really don't think Brummell had anything whatsoever to do with the men's basketball program. It doesn't really matter. I also think it's notable that we have a female Chief of Staff given that Ronnie drove out the only higher-ranking female in an important role under Ewing. Does anybody think there's any chance that Ronnie would have been okay with this move? Of course not. It's a big change from the past, actually. People also talk about "winners" and "losers," which I think is often silly. But, if you're one of those people, sure, it's bowling, but Brummell was an extremely high level coach, winning three NCAA championships (and the team she left behind to come to Georgetown won again) at Eastern Shore. And she was a hugely successful coach over an extended period of time, experience nobody under the Ewing regime had.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 21, 2023 8:46:53 GMT -5
I assume that your statement (what I bolded above) is based on the schedule. While that's a valid point, I am not sure I buy it. Providence last year had the 352nd worst OOC schedule and they made the tournament. I don't think Cooley gave up on that team before the season started. In my mind, you have to play the best guys until it's obvious you're not going to be competitive. If that's Heath, so be it. Keep in mind we are also coming from a season where Ewing played a super tight rotation. I don't expect that will be the case, at least initially. I don't think anybody will play as many minutes as Spears did last year, for example. So, there'll be more minutes to go around. Correct on the schedule - keep in mind, Providence barely squeaked in as an at-large after going 13-7 in a loaded Big East last season. Does anybody realistically expect the Hoyas to have a record like that in the 2023-2024 Big East? friars.com/sports/mens-basketball/schedule/2022-23If Heath is substantially better than Epps and/or Brumbaugh as to get a lot more minutes than either of them, we're in trouble in 2024-2025 and beyond. Heath is a proven loser. He scores points and doesn't defend particularly well while playing for bad teams. He doesn't facilitate for others and he doesn't provide leadership. I get why we kept him, particularly as an insurance policy against injury to Epps/Brumbaugh, but I don't think it bodes well for the medium-term future of the program if he's getting a ton of minutes and shots this coming season. No, I don't think we will go 13-7, but you never know. As far as Heath, I think you aren't factoring in that he generally has played for pretty bad teams in his career, and I think you'll certainly agree that the team/staff he played for last year was pretty horrendous. Heath is not, and has never been, a ball-hog type like Primo Spears last year, for example. And he has shot 38% from three on some very bad teams and some teams with weak coaching. If he can shoot 38% for us from three next year, he clearly has a role on this team. People also get bent out of shape over who starts (which is what began this whole discussion), which misses the point. I think there's a distinct possibility Heath starts (at least at the beginning of the year), but will not play a ridiculously large amount of minutes. As I said, if you look at Cooley's usage of players, he keeps rotations that are fairly wide compared to what Ewing did last year. As I said, there's a delicate balance between trying to be competitive and developing players. I guarantee you if Cooley started all freshman/young guys, some people on here would complain that Cooley isn't allowing the veterans to show the younger players how it's done, and then complain when we have closes losses that would have been avoidable had the more experienced people like Heath played. If the difference between playing Heath higher minutes in Big East play is the difference between a 5-15 record, and an 8-10 record, for example, I would choose the latter, as long as our younger guys get playing time too. This program has had so much losing in recent years, we need to try to win meaningful games and show there's a spark there.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 21, 2023 3:12:31 GMT -5
The other issue who, who knows what the Chief of Staff's role and responsibilities will be under Cooley? Clearly, under Ewing, Ronnie Thompson's Chief of Staff role was hands-on, as indicated by his role in finding assistants, etc. I think he had his hands all over the program. My sense is that Brummell will likely do what a Chief of Staff would typically do, which is handle more logistical issues and administration. In that sense, hiring somebody who actually knows the administration might be helpful. Based on everything we have read, the Ronnie/Ewing era program largely ran on its own outside the normal confines of the athletic department. So, in a way, Brummell probably is an outsider to some degree. As for the women's program, yes the program has been bad, but I am not sure how much of that you can put on Brummell, given that the type of role she had likely had very little input on the factors that make a program good/bad. If Cooley is good with the hire, I am. I would note that while these types of positions are relatively new, there is a big difference between Chief of Staff (largely administrative) and General Manager type roles (which we do not have, but Villanova has, for example). I would view a General Manager type of role as someone who does have their hands on the program in guiding it. I do not view Chief of Staff in that way. Of course, none of us know what Brummell's exact role will be, but I suspect it will be very different from whatever Ronnie did. I think in a general sense it's hard to make an argument from the outside as to why anyone that's been connected to the basketball program in any way, shape or form should continue going forward. While I agree with you in principle (and basically said that on HoyaTalk--that I didn't want anybody involved in our program under Ewing to continue), it's inapt here. She joined Georgetown as the senior associate director of athletics for business & finance and was later promoted to executive senior associate athletics director for business & finance/senior woman administrator in October of 2021. She clearly was not a Ewing or Ronny hire, and she was here long before he was coach. So, your point is not really relevant here.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 20, 2023 12:24:47 GMT -5
Heath was certainly a member of the "my turn" offense that Ewing ran for his hired guns. I would hope and expect that Heath gets less playing time than Epps and Brumbaugh. Cooley has pretty much already waved the white flag on being competitive in the 2023-2024 season, so there's not much reason to play Heath ahead of two guys that will be here when we're good again. I assume that your statement (what I bolded above) is based on the schedule. While that's a valid point, I am not sure I buy it. Providence last year had the 352nd worst OOC schedule and they made the tournament. I don't think Cooley gave up on that team before the season started. In my mind, you have to play the best guys until it's obvious you're not going to be competitive. If that's Heath, so be it. Keep in mind we are also coming from a season where Ewing played a super tight rotation. I don't expect that will be the case, at least initially. I don't think anybody will play as many minutes as Spears did last year, for example. So, there'll be more minutes to go around. Obviously, development is important. 2024-2025 should be a better season than 2023-2024, and you need to play your transfers/freshman because you want them to be integrated into the team and stay for additional years. But, people also like to win. So, it's a balance. I don't think the choice is (a) play your veterans to win as much as possible, and (b) just play the younger guys who will be crucial for years ahead. In my mind, Akok almost certainly should get significant playing time this year, as I highly doubt there will be others better than him, and Heath will probably get some time too because he's a proven shooter (and really should be better under Cooley than under Ewing's mess of an offense). IF they give you the best chance to win, you do that. Winning will help morale, it will boost our odds recruiting (since it bolsters the "Cooley has the program on the rise" narrative), and it will help garner interest in the program. A lot of this is kind of silly too, in the sense that we have hardly anybody returning and overall our roster is fairly young. Unless I am missing somebody, Heath, Akok, and Massoud are the only ones with no eligibility left after this year. That's three guys. Massoud didn't play a ton of minutes last year, Heath played only about 54% of available minutes, and even Akok only played 72.2% of available minutes. Add on top the fact that Heath is the only super-senior guard (and not a particularly great ball handler), and that means there is going to be a lot of guard time available no matter how much Heath plays. Cooley's use of guys has really varied with the teams he's coached. For example, in 2019-2020, nobody had more than 32.7 minutes a game played, and a lot of guys played a lot of minutes, whereas in 2020-2021, David Duke played almost 37.1 minutes per game, or Bryce Cotton who averaged 39.9 minutes per game in 2014. But in several other years, nobody is even nearly that high in usage. Overall, Cooley generally has a lot of guys who average over 10 mpg in the games they do play, and tends to use a fairly wide roster. There is going to be plenty of playing time for those who deserve it, simply because we don't have the star type players deserving of those minutes. And if it turns out we do have guys that are THAT good, by all means play them hard and let's win some games.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 20, 2023 12:18:19 GMT -5
"lurking around" where? We just hired Brummell into his old position. He drove all of the women out of the basketball program. I don't think there's a clearer rejection of his tenure than that announcement, or anything that contrasts old way vs new way as much. Brummell has been working in the Georgetown athletic department since 2012. Most recently, she oversaw the women's basketball program, which hasn't exactly had a lot of success. Not sure how this "contrasts old way vs. new way" other than formally acknowledging that Ronny does not have the Chief of Staff title (which is a very positive move in and of itself). guhoyas.com/sports/womens-lacrosse/roster/staff/sharon-brummell/57Personally, I've been thrilled with Cooley's hires, bringing his assistants with him from Providence, the strength and conditioning coach from Providence, and some more junior positions on staff being filled by a couple of his younger former players. I would've liked the chief of staff hire to come from outside of Georgetown as well, so not sure how much this was his hire vs. somebody else's. The other issue who, who knows what the Chief of Staff's role and responsibilities will be under Cooley? Clearly, under Ewing, Ronnie Thompson's Chief of Staff role was hands-on, as indicated by his role in finding assistants, etc. I think he had his hands all over the program. My sense is that Brummell will likely do what a Chief of Staff would typically do, which is handle more logistical issues and administration. In that sense, hiring somebody who actually knows the administration might be helpful. Based on everything we have read, the Ronnie/Ewing era program largely ran on its own outside the normal confines of the athletic department. So, in a way, Brummell probably is an outsider to some degree. As for the women's program, yes the program has been bad, but I am not sure how much of that you can put on Brummell, given that the type of role she had likely had very little input on the factors that make a program good/bad. If Cooley is good with the hire, I am. I would note that while these types of positions are relatively new, there is a big difference between Chief of Staff (largely administrative) and General Manager type roles (which we do not have, but Villanova has, for example). I would view a General Manager type of role as someone who does have their hands on the program in guiding it. I do not view Chief of Staff in that way. Of course, none of us know what Brummell's exact role will be, but I suspect it will be very different from whatever Ronnie did.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 20, 2023 9:48:56 GMT -5
As with most of the ideas of the administration, I hoped this one would be retired with Cooley’s hiring but unfortunately Lee Reed, Dan O’Neil & the folks who report to them haven’t matched Cooley & staff’s energy levels yet… I’ll ask again what exactly do they do to enhance the program? Even the Tre King thing was silly. You can always make changes to your roster and/or staff as needed. Every one over there with the old mindset needs to get on board with 2023. Or at least 2005. I agree. I don't understand it either, but among the various annoyances that are out there, I really think this one is a minimal one. It would be one thing if we had no idea what the roster looked like, but literally we have all the roster information except what number each guy will have this coming season, and the biographies they put online that very few people read anyway. I am more curious about the staff, only because I am curious what the exact titles, will be but again, we basically know all the staff and we know that Cooley is looking for a new Chief of Staff/GM (thank god), and so that could be the hold up too (and why it's not posted yet). Really, I am so pleased so far with Ed Cooley and the changed approach, I really cannot get myself worked up about these things, especially since I highly doubt Cooley has anything to do with posting rosters on websites. Does it indicate an administration/sports administration that isn't with it yet? Maybe, but then again, I imagine that's much of what would fall under the Chief of Staff role that (a) hasn't had a qualified/skilled occupant in years, and (b) seems to be an empty position for now.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 18, 2023 18:38:38 GMT -5
"Rutgers Basketball's Top Five OOC opponents this season Now that the entire 2023-24 Rutgers Basketball out of conference schedule has been revealed, let’s take a look at what will be the top five key non-conference games... 5. GEORGETOWN (Nov. 15th at Jersey Mike's Arena) You might ask yourself, why is this game in my list of Top 5 key 2023-24 non-conference games for Rutgers? It’s simple. One name. Ed Cooley. Rutgers fans, think back to mid- to late-May timeframe when Cam Spencer made his stunning announcement when he intended to transfer from Rutgers. Multiple sources/reports indicated newly anointed Georgetown head coach Ed Cooley was one of the drivers behind Spencer’s decision as he tampered with the roster (and has likely tampered with other teams’ rosters). In the end, Spencer never visited Georgetown and wound up committing to UConn but Ed Cooley’s unprecedented move did not sit well with the Rutgers fan base. Rutgers fans will be salivating at the mouth when Georgetown visits Jersey Mike’s Arena and the Scarlet Knights will surely want to blow the doors off the Hoyas. A win over Georgetown would help Rutgers notch a victory in what appears to be the last version of the Gavitt Tipoff Games but it would help the Scarlet Knights avoid a damaging Quadrant 3 home loss. Also, a win over Georgetown would give Rutgers fans closure and reason to smile after the damage Ed Cooley caused in the off-season." rutgers.rivals.com/news/rutgers-basketball-s-top-five-ooc-opponents-this-seasonWhat on earth are these idiots on about?? So based on this telling of the story, Cam Spencer had zero intention of transferring from Rutgers, Ed Cooley became involved in trying to get him to transfer, and then Cam Spencer decided to enter the portal but didn't even visit Georgetown, and then transferred elsewhere. It's hard to believe that a guy like Spencer would have stayed at Rutgers but for Ed Cooley, but maybe this guy knows more than I do. Perhaps the ire should be directed at Rutgers' head coach for not retaining him?
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 18, 2023 18:32:34 GMT -5
I simultaneously think that it's often silly that Georgetown waits longer than most to do these sorts of things, while at the same time finding it funny that so many people get bent out of shape over it. To me, the roster being posted is even less important than the staff because we actually know who is on the roster.
Further, Georgetown has never been the type of place to trickle out a roster, and if McKenna's status is unclear, they might be waiting for that resolution. I recall a while back when it was obvious that Georgetown was waiting on Tre King's status because as soon as it was reported he wouldn't be on the team, the roster went live.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 17, 2023 15:44:15 GMT -5
Serious question: can someone like McKenna at the same time (a) be finishing up high school credits to graduate from high school and (b) be enrolled at Georgetown University? It would seem to be odd to be enrolled before you are a high school graduate? Many kids at my son’s and daughter’s high schools were taking college courses early. Fundamentally, it is no different. Yes and no. Of course, high school students have taken college courses early for years. But, when high school students do that, they are not enrolled at a university. Generally, you're still at your high school. And, I am assuming that's what McKenna is doing this summer. Taking classes in DC to try to qualify (unless it is a standardized test issue, in which case it would be different) would be akin to high school students taking college courses early. But, that wasn't my question. To be clearer, my question is can someone be enrolled as a scholarship student at Georgetown while having not finished high school yet? I would think not. In other words, let's say it's late August and McKenna doesn't have a high school degree. Can Georgetown give him room and board? For the record, I am just legitimately curious, since this is not a normal question, though one that I assume comes up in college athletics all the time in revenue sports. Hopefully, McKenna can suit up in November and all will be good.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 17, 2023 15:05:41 GMT -5
Serious question: can someone like McKenna at the same time (a) be finishing up high school credits to graduate from high school and (b) be enrolled at Georgetown University? It would seem to be odd to be enrolled before you are a high school graduate?
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 16, 2023 13:21:44 GMT -5
Looks like this isn't a sure thing yet:
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 16, 2023 12:20:12 GMT -5
With the normal caveats regarding Kenner, I am still more excited than I have been in years for the start of next season. It seeems like Cooley has put together a really strong set of players, and from the reporting here from MCI and others it seems like everybody has a good motor and drive (as much as you can evaluate something like that in Kenner). It will be exciting to see it all come together under Cooley and the staff.
I realize that over the last year few years under Ewing, my posting probably made it seem like I was overly pessimistic (and under Ewing I really didn't expect us to get better, which turned out to be true, so not sure it was pessimism as much as an acknowledgement of reality), but I am really an optimistic when it comes to guys developing and having potential. That's one of the great things about college basketball we really lost the last few years. There's always a chance of guys developing, our team being better than expected, etc.
Despite the poor status of our program the last few years, I am unwilling to concede that we cannot be a real competitor in the Big East this season, or maybe even be a bubble team IF things come together. It's unlikely, but I like the guys we have put together, and I think the returning players (Bristol, Akok, Heath, Mutombo) could get a LOT better with a better coach, a real system, and real instruction on defense. Add to that the other pieces and hopefully a good team dynamic (rather than hero ball), and I think we could be pretty good.
The other beauty of college basketball is that you really only need one or two guys to be a lot better than expected, and suddenly the whole team is better. This is one of the reasons I love college basketball.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 15, 2023 15:04:58 GMT -5
Whoa, stop, who is this? Don't you know the board rules? You cannot say anything positive about the coach... You about to be banned... This is unfair. For the most part, Cooley has been overwhelmingly getting positive attention from everybody. Even hoyaboya liked his opening presser. But some people like to complain about fictional things just to have something to complain about.
|
|