we are a joke of a program

We've made zero nits or ncaas in the last seven seasons including this one which we are NOT on pace to make either.  Half the fan base roots for us to lose in hopes that's enough to force the admin to hire a new coach.  The other half gets hard when we beat horrible teams who also won't make the ncaa and then start dreaming we might make the ncaa when we aren't even on pace to make the nit.

We have no chance to beat cuse.
We have no chance to beat pitt.

That means at BEST if we somehow beat marq and depaul we end the BE season 7-11.  Improvement in year 6? Nope.

That is and should be enough to get the worst head coach I have ever seen at this level in my life who must be fr harrington and rshf's son fired.

In the meantime, what the hell is the good to get mad at those who continue to root for the team or are delusional and think norm can turn it around?

Likewise, what is the good in arguing with those who root for losses so that there's a better chance norm is fired?

We all root for st johns and just have diff opinions, yet nearly everyone on these sites needs to prove that the way they approach st johns basketball is RIGHT and they are the superfan.

Its pathetic. Come on guys.  Everyone should be smart enough here to understand the other side and let it be.

As for me, I have never rooted for st johns to lose.  I also prefer a new coach and am sick of how this coach has these players play the worst coached bball in st johns history. 
Wake me up when we are on the NCAA bubble.  Or we have a new coach.  I have no interest in a norm roberts coached team unless there is some epiphany that hasn't occurred in six years.

AMEN SISTER!!!!

I'm always rooting for a win. Just like I did when Brian Mahoney lost at home to a Miami team that was far worse than Providence and Seton Hall are this year.

The few remaining fans who do root against us, just don't seem to get it. The administration no longer cares how this team performs on the court. They have not been motivated to even consider a change. So what do you get for rooting against your own team: nothing. That's what.

  Good post Kid.  Its very simple, if you don't like whats going on. Stop supporting it.  Don't go to games, don't spend money on tix, don't donate to school.  Thats all you can do. The rest is all noise.
  I mean, seriously, look at the Garden now for games, its embarrassing and pathetic.  And there is nothing wrong if you do still support the school.  Go right ahead. Enjoy sitting in an empty garden watching 50 point slugfests.  Its just not for me anymore.

I think everyone overuses the word joke.

The program's not very funny.  Embarrassment's a better word. 

And agreed with Poison.  The administration's goals are different than... well, everyone else's.  I think money has been and continues to be a factor in their decisions.  And the rest of their decisionmaking is a bit beyond me.  I think people have it right when they say that the admin's scared of any kind of scandal, but I don't purport to understand their process.

AMEN SISTER!!!!

This might be post of the decade

I think everyone overuses the word joke.

The program's not very funny.  Embarrassment's a better word. 

And agreed with Poison.  The administration's goals are different than... well, everyone else's.  I think money has been and continues to be a factor in their decisions.  And the rest of their decisionmaking is a bit beyond me.  I think people have it right when they say that the admin's scared of any kind of scandal, but I don't purport to understand their process.

If the admin is factoring in money, it's news to me.

I think they like not having to shell out $1M+ for a coach.  The school's trying to cut down academic costs, so it stands to reason that the pinch that's affecting that area is affecting the athletic budget.  I thought it was accepted that one of the reasons that Fran's time was so short was that he was playing the "I could get paid more somewhere else" game that all college coaches do; and Jarvis' flirtation with the Wizards didn't go over well.

In Norm, they have a guy for whom this is his dream destination job, and maybe they think that even if he was successful, he won't ask for big commensurate raises.  Another coach comes here - let's say for $1M, I don't think anyone with experience is coming for less than that, but I could be wrong (and they would be foolish based on Keno Davis' contract) - and they'd have a right to ask for performance bonuses and perks that will cost.

I think they like not having to shell out $1M+ for a coach.  The school's trying to cut down academic costs, so it stands to reason that the pinch that's affecting that area is affecting the athletic budget.  I thought it was accepted that one of the reasons that Fran's time was so short was that he was playing the "I could get paid more somewhere else" game that all college coaches do; and Jarvis' flirtation with the Wizards didn't go over well.

In Norm, they have a guy for whom this is his dream destination job, and maybe they think that even if he was successful, he won't ask for big commensurate raises.  Another coach comes here - let's say for $1M, I don't think anyone with experience is coming for less than that, but I could be wrong (and they would be foolish based on Keno Davis' contract) - and they'd have a right to ask for performance bonuses and perks that will cost.

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.

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.

True.  Hopefully a guy like that is available, and the admin makes a change. 

We are a game away from having our NIT bubble popped and it's not even March yet.  We are 13th in the league and 14 and 15 have beaten us.   

The administration's goals are different than... well, everyone else's.  I think money has been and continues to be a factor in their decisions.  And the rest of their decisionmaking is a bit beyond me.  I think people have it right when they say that the admin's scared of any kind of scandal, but I don't purport to understand their process.

Regarding money. The administration has figured - rightly - that having a mediocre basketball team doesn't cost them that much revenue and that spending more money (short of a massive increase that would put them on a par with say Louisville) on the program is at best a break even proposition. (I know it is a popular meme that the university is losing millions of dollars by fielding a subpar product, but the numbers don't bear that out. And it's impossible to believe that the people who run the program haven't run the numbers - that the only people who don't realize that basketball is big business are the people who pay the expenses to support it.) Where the money angle might figure is that the administration prefers to spend the money it might spend on an improved basketball product in other areas that will result in greater good for the community, which is in keeping with the administration's view of the mission of a Catholic university. Eg, a million dollar bump in the coach's salary is the cost of about 40 academic scholarships.

Regarding scandal. The administration is not "scared" of a scandal. What the administration has said is that certain behaviors are unacceptable and that if big time athletics cannot exist without those behaviors, then big time athletics will not exist. Because otherwise the university is encouraging or engendering sin - which is exactly the opposite of what they're supposed to be doing.

In Norm's first year, when he only had "left over" players, the team won 5 Big East games. You would think that 5 seasons later with a roster full of players he recruited there might be significantly better results.

13th, 13th, 11th, 14th, 13th, and he is currently 13th  - that says its all. He has been consistent, consistently bad as a head coach.

In Norm's first year, when he only had "left over" players, the team won 5 Big East games. You would think that 5 seasons later with a roster full of players he recruited there might be significantly better results.

13th, 13th, 11th, 14th, 13th, and he is currently 13th  - that says its all. He has been consistent, consistently bad as a head coach.

He's headed for his fifth Final Four in six years.  That is consistency

In Norm's first year, when he only had "left over" players, the team won 5 Big East games. You would think that 5 seasons later with a roster full of players he recruited there might be significantly better results.

13th, 13th, 11th, 14th, 13th, and he is currently 13th  - that says its all. He has been consistent, consistently bad as a head coach.

I thought we won 3 BE games Norm's first year? 5 his 2nd. 7 his 3rd, then 4, 6, and now maybe 6, again.

Regarding money. The administration has figured - rightly - that having a mediocre basketball team doesn't cost them that much revenue and that spending more money (short of a massive increase that would put them on a par with say Louisville) on the program is at best a break even proposition. (I know it is a popular meme that the university is losing millions of dollars by fielding a subpar product, but the numbers don't bear that out. And it's impossible to believe that the people who run the program haven't run the numbers - that the only people who don't realize that basketball is big business are the people who pay the expenses to support it.)

Scared's a little overdramatic, I suppose?  How about highly averse to scandal. 

I think we're generally agreed here, Foad. And St. John's gets a share of the league's money from ESPN, I believe, so the program doesn't necessarily have to draw well to be a profit center (if they are).

Quote from: pmg911 on February 22, 2010, 11:27:42 AM

In Norm's first year, when he only had "left over" players, the team won 5 Big East games. You would think that 5 seasons later with a roster full of players he recruited there might be significantly better results.

13th, 13th, 11th, 14th, 13th, and he is currently 13th  - that says its all. He has been consistent, consistently bad as a head coach.

I thought we won 3 BE games Norm's first year? 5 his 2nd. 7 his 3rd, then 4, 6, and now maybe 6, again.

You are correct, I looked the years incorrectly, my apologies...

that being said..     13th, 13th, 11th, 14th, 13th, and he is currently 13th  - that says its all.. . it still stands...

Quote from: Foad on February 22, 2010, 11:23:58 AM

Regarding money. The administration has figured - rightly - that having a mediocre basketball team doesn't cost them that much revenue and that spending more money (short of a massive increase that would put them on a par with say Louisville) on the program is at best a break even proposition. (I know it is a popular meme that the university is losing millions of dollars by fielding a subpar product, but the numbers don't bear that out. And it's impossible to believe that the people who run the program haven't run the numbers - that the only people who don't realize that basketball is big business are the people who pay the expenses to support it.)

Scared's a little overdramatic, I suppose?  How about highly averse to scandal. 

I think we're generally agreed here, Foad. And St. John's gets a share of the league's money from ESPN, I believe, so the program doesn't necessarily have to draw well to be a profit center (if they are).

I agree that we agree. I was riffing on "thought processes."

The big money comes from revenue sharing via the tournament. In the case of which, you don't  have to be in it to win it. The rest -- attendance, merchandise, concessions -- is negligible. Nobody wants to hear it, but it's true.

Quote from: Poison on February 22, 2010, 11:39:15 AM

Quote from: pmg911 on February 22, 2010, 11:27:42 AM

In Norm's first year, when he only had "left over" players, the team won 5 Big East games. You would think that 5 seasons later with a roster full of players he recruited there might be significantly better results.

13th, 13th, 11th, 14th, 13th, and he is currently 13th  - that says its all. He has been consistent, consistently bad as a head coach.

I thought we won 3 BE games Norm's first year? 5 his 2nd. 7 his 3rd, then 4, 6, and now maybe 6, again.

You are correct, I looked the years incorrectly, my apologies...

that being said..     13th, 13th, 11th, 14th, 13th, and he is currently 13th  - that says its all.. . it still stands...

Groundhog Day

Quote from: peter on February 22, 2010, 10:17:53 AM

The administration's goals are different than... well, everyone else's.  I think money has been and continues to be a factor in their decisions.  And the rest of their decisionmaking is a bit beyond me.  I think people have it right when they say that the admin's scared of any kind of scandal, but I don't purport to understand their process.

Regarding money. The administration has figured - rightly - that having a mediocre basketball team doesn't cost them that much revenue and that spending more money (short of a massive increase that would put them on a par with say Louisville) on the program is at best a break even proposition. (I know it is a popular meme that the university is losing millions of dollars by fielding a subpar product, but the numbers don't bear that out. And it's impossible to believe that the people who run the program haven't run the numbers - that the only people who don't realize that basketball is big business are the people who pay the expenses to support it.) Where the money angle might figure is that the administration prefers to spend the money it might spend on an improved basketball product in other areas that will result in greater good for the community, which is in keeping with the administration's view of the mission of a Catholic university. Eg, a million dollar bump in the coach's salary is the cost of about 40 academic scholarships.

Regarding scandal. The administration is not "scared" of a scandal. What the administration has said is that certain behaviors are unacceptable and that if big time athletics cannot exist without those behaviors, then big time athletics will not exist. Because otherwise the university is encouraging or engendering sin - which is exactly the opposite of what they're supposed to be doing.

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 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?