Chicken or the Egg? Winning or Recruiting?

With all these talks of recruiting in 2011 and marquee names, I beg the question. Will recruits come here if we continue to be at the bottom of the big east?

Norm has been quoted saying something to the extent that we need players in here to win but you also need to win to get players?

So what will happen first?

Will we get these guys even if we aren't too good this year? Or does our record this season indicate where we stand with the class of 2011? How much of an impact does it have?

i think it depends on the player.  some guys want to stay home (omari) others want to play for teams that win.  others want to be with a familar aau coach while others may want something under the table. 

if we make the ncaa's i do expect recruiting to pick up though. 

You have to start with recruiting, reestablish relationship with people in basketball community that were damage by a egotiscal coach who thought that he was beyond approach. Then you give chances to young man who are willing to develope themself on and off the court. For example Rob Thomas you was taught to overcome the handicap and finally won. By showing others that you truely care for your player when their are they weakness moment in life, helps greatly with recruitment. He has given others chances but they were reluctate to go the full route. Winning comes with respect from coaches to player and player to coach. Theses kids are willing to do what is needed to win on and off the court. Rob Thomas to me should be the team captain. This coming season the drought will finally be over.

I'd say mostly no - there is playing time to sell but if St. John's and Norm can't touch the NCAAs by 2011, that's what, 10 years since the NCAA tournament? There's nothing new to sell, like Hill or Gonzalez had their first few recruiting classes. This team has to show something this year to bring in a few impact recruits, guys who can contribute immediately.

If we make the NCAAs, oh, people will talk about how great the coaching is, it'll be a huge story... and recruits will come.

Recruits will ask themselves do I want to play with Omari, Malik Stit and the rest of the crew. Will I get playing time. Will we win, play in the NCAA's tournament. It's a combination of things. The top players are about being developed into Pros and playing in the NCAA's. Norm has not accomplished both. This is our best and deepest team in a longtime...can't wait to see them play.

Well, the first chicken--if you subscribe to the Darwinist evolutionary school of thought--was a mutation of another animal closely related to the chicken.  Whether or not this other animal laid eggs I cannot say.

Following that line of reasoning, I think we can find a suitable answer to the winning/recruiting question.  Recruiting a hidden gem or a player that outperformed expectation--perhaps due to the playing time and subsequent experiences/growth--similar to the mutation that created the first chicken--would get the team winning and that would attract a better pool of recruits that would, in turn, lead to more winning.

Well, the first chicken--if you subscribe to the Darwinist evolutionary school of thought--was a mutation of another animal closely related to the chicken.  Whether or not this other animal laid eggs I cannot say.

Following that line of reasoning, I think we can find a suitable answer to the winning/recruiting question.  Recruiting a hidden gem or a player that outperformed expectation--perhaps due to the playing time and subsequent experiences/growth--similar to the mutation that created the first chicken--would get the team winning and that would attract a better pool of recruits that would, in turn, lead to more winning.

Look at Marillac getting all scientific on us. 

Be careful, Marrilac.  Talking about evolution may be a crime in Kentucky.

Well, the first chicken--if you subscribe to the Darwinist evolutionary school of thought--was a mutation of another animal closely related to the chicken.  Whether or not this other animal laid eggs I cannot say.

There's zero evidence in the fossil record that supports Darwin's theory of gradual evolution. Even Darwin admitted that, a fact he blamed on incompleteness of the fossil record. On the contrary, the lack of transitional fossils suggests that whatever "evolution" might have occurred was precipitous and cataclysmic. Stephen Gould called it punctuated equilibrium - long periods of stability punctuated by abrupt and grotesque genetic changes.

Which is to say, Norm's laid lots of eggs, but none of them have become chickens.

Like someone else said...now that were 5 years in...he will need to win to get recruits.  If we can play good this year and the young kids show some talent then kids may look our way.

At this point its all about the ncaas. If we get in, the recruits will come. If we miss again, they won't.

I agree with marillac - with norm since he clearly isn't some sort of guru, he needs to have a keen eye for talent and have some mutations like kennedy evans horne, add brownlee perhaps and justin developing and he might just have that mutated chicken.

Maybe we should start buying some chicken$ or even the egg$, like most teams do

Maybe we should start buying some chicken$ or even the egg$, like most teams do

New Mascot?

Quote from: Marillac on July 16, 2009, 11:59:25 PM

Well, the first chicken--if you subscribe to the Darwinist evolutionary school of thought--was a mutation of another animal closely related to the chicken.  Whether or not this other animal laid eggs I cannot say.

There's zero evidence in the fossil record that supports Darwin's theory of gradual evolution. Even Darwin admitted that, a fact he blamed on incompleteness of the fossil record. On the contrary, the lack of transitional fossils suggests that whatever "evolution" might have occurred was precipitous and cataclysmic. Stephen Gould called it punctuated equilibrium - long periods of stability punctuated by abrupt and grotesque genetic changes.

Which is to say, Norm's laid lots of eggs, but none of them have become chickens.

Thanks for the contribution, Father.

If we had a coach that understood the game better, we'd be a better program.
Kids won't choose us over NC, but some would like to avoid aweful places like Cinci and Pittsburgh.

What it all 'bout:

"What, wasn't there some of the other kids, what'd we give 'em? What? Cars? Tractors? Gave a kid a TRACTOR? Another kid we gave a HOUSE. Didn't we give him a house? You know, BAGS OF CASH, I don't know what we gave these kids...You know, they asked for things, we gave it to 'em. I mean, you guys asked me to win, and I gave that to you! Right? And the Alumni are all jerking off over this win, which is the only time the Alumni ever jerk off, right? It's when we win. 'Cause this ain't about education! It ain't much about winning, and it sure as hell ain't much about basketball! It's about MONEY! JUST GODDAMNED MONEY! That's what it's about, Ed. And I bought into it. I bought into it big time. I'm a big part of the problem."

And the Alumni are all jerking off over this win, which is the only time the Alumni ever jerk off, right? It's when we win. '

Good thing I'm not an alum, I jerk off about 16 times a week.

Quote from: Choz4Life on July 17, 2009, 02:13:53 PM

And the Alumni are all jerking off over this win, which is the only time the Alumni ever jerk off, right? It's when we win. '

Good thing I'm not an alum, I jerk off about 16 times a week.

I can safely say that this is the post I least expected to see when I logged in tonight.

You don't want to go blind now, though: We may actually be exciting to watch.

This went wildly off topic

If we had a coach that understood the game better, we'd be a better program.
Kids won't choose us over NC, but some would like to avoid aweful places like Cinci and Pittsburgh.

or even worse dumps like Syracuse