we are a joke of a program

This is pretty much my argument with your buddy Fordham over on the Redmen site. He disagrees based on some sort of convoluted thought process that I have yet to figure out.

I have an electric watch that's harder to wind up than that guy. Between you and me, he's not very bright. Shtum.

I wholeheartedly agree that the admin must have run the numbers and came to the conclusion that 6 more wins and a tourney game or two(basically the Louie years) would not generate enough revenue for them to fire someone they clearly wish to keep.

My only issue with this is could't they hire someone who in addition to running a clean program could succesfully run a play. Someone like Bob McKillop or someone?

I suppose they could and suspect they thought they had. It'd be hard to predict that someone who's spent nearly their whole life coaching basketball would be as spectacularly incompetent at it as Norm has proven to be. To me, the issue for next year is: even if they cared and I don't think they do, why would they make a change when all their patience is about to pay off: it'll be nearly impossible for this team to not make the tournament next year. So why should they change: if it ain't fixed, don't break it.

We have no chance to beat pitt.

We can beat Pitt.  They don't score and play D and ugly ball like us.  The road game was close and they have a big time home court edge.

Why can't we nose them out in a low scoring garden slugfest?

Quote from: we are sju on February 22, 2010, 01:20:57 PM

This is pretty much my argument with your buddy Fordham over on the Redmen site. He disagrees based on some sort of convoluted thought process that I have yet to figure out.

I have an electric watch that's harder to wind up than that guy. Between you and me, he's not very bright. Shtum.

Quote

I wholeheartedly agree that the admin must have run the numbers and came to the conclusion that 6 more wins and a tourney game or two(basically the Louie years) would not generate enough revenue for them to fire someone they clearly wish to keep.

My only issue with this is could't they hire someone who in addition to running a clean program could succesfully run a play. Someone like Bob McKillop or someone?

I suppose they could and suspect they thought they had. It'd be hard to predict that someone who's spent nearly their whole life coaching basketball would be as spectacularly incompetent at it as Norm has proven to be. To me, the issue for next year is: even if they cared and I don't think they do, why would they make a change when all their patience is about to pay off: it'll be nearly impossible for this team to not make the tournament next year. So why should they change: if it ain't fixed, don't break it.

I think we have a better record next year, but predict we still fall short of the NCAA's. NIT would be my guess.The problem of course is the year after could very well be a sub 10 win team.

I think we have a better record next year, but predict we still fall short of the NCAA's. NIT would be my guess.The problem of course is the year after could very well be a sub 10 win team.

I hear Coach Jim Baron loves a fixer-upper.

Quote from: we are sju on February 22, 2010, 01:20:57 PM

This is pretty much my argument with your buddy Fordham over on the Redmen site. He disagrees based on some sort of convoluted thought process that I have yet to figure out.

I have an electric watch that's harder to wind up than that guy. Between you and me, he's not very bright. Shtum.

Quote

I wholeheartedly agree that the admin must have run the numbers and came to the conclusion that 6 more wins and a tourney game or two(basically the Louie years) would not generate enough revenue for them to fire someone they clearly wish to keep.

My only issue with this is could't they hire someone who in addition to running a clean program could succesfully run a play. Someone like Bob McKillop or someone?

I suppose they could and suspect they thought they had. It'd be hard to predict that someone who's spent nearly their whole life coaching basketball would be as spectacularly incompetent at it as Norm has proven to be. To me, the issue for next year is: even if they cared and I don't think they do, why would they make a change when all their patience is about to pay off: it'll be nearly impossible for this team to not make the tournament next year. So why should they change: if it ain't fixed, don't break it.

How is it almost impossible for this team not to make the tournament? What is going to change?
If the players haven't learned anything by now, what's going to happen in one more summer?

That's the same line that Monasch fed last year on WFAN.

It's already next year, and we're going nowhere worth going.

Quote from: we are sju on February 22, 2010, 02:19:02 PM

I think we have a better record next year, but predict we still fall short of the NCAA's. NIT would be my guess.The problem of course is the year after could very well be a sub 10 win team.

I hear Coach Jim Baron loves a fixer-upper.

I actually was introduced to Coach Baron recently and was tempted to ask him about his intrerest in the program, but, in the end, I felt the timing and occasion wasn't appropriate.

If the players haven't learned anything by now, what's going to happen in one more summer?

I dunno. Ask David Cain.

I think we have a better record next year, but predict we still fall short of the NCAA's. NIT would be my guess.The problem of course is the year after could very well be a sub 10 win team.

You're something of a pessimist. If we don't make the tournament next year with nine seniors we never will. Next stop Atlantic 10.

Quote from: Poison on February 22, 2010, 02:40:03 PM

If the players haven't learned anything by now, what's going to happen in one more summer?

I dunno. Ask David Cain.

Unique situation, he barely played then all of a sudden was great. I guess Stith pulling a Cain three years from now would be the only thing comparable. I do not remember a player playing for three years at a poor level than all of a sudden blossoming his senior year. Usually if you stink for three years you will stink your 4th year as well.

Unique situation, he barely played then all of a sudden was great. I guess Stith pulling a Cain three years from now would be the only thing comparable. I do not remember a player playing for three years at a poor level than all of a sudden blossoming his senior year. Usually if you stink for three years you will stink your 4th year as well.

Short answer: Donald Emmanuel (he wasn't great but as a senior he was light years ahead of his junior year). Louie's entire coaching philosophy was based on having on a cadre of seniors on which to rely. At some point the light just goes on. If its good enough for the HOF it's good enough for me.
'
This team isn't too far from being adequate, especially now that Burrell and Boothe seem to have gotten it. None of the players "stink" - they're just not as talented as their opponents. AFAICT they just need to improve a little to be a mediocre BE team, which should be good enough to make the tournament, regardless of who's coaching.

You can get a coach, who's best ability is actually coaching the game, and winning will come naturally.

You don't need to get top 10 talent win in the BE. What you need to get is a guy who can develop players, and a system that makes sense. Burrell should be an NBA player by now. It's ridiculous that Roberts' system is poor that our most talented player doesn't even start.

i agree completely. too bad our administration will never get this\hire a good coach.