NY Times Article on Mullin & Staff

  • 5 replies
  • 1942 views

nudginator59

  • *****
  • 1437
  • It's better to be a Smart ass then a Dumb shart
Re: NY Times Article on Mullin & Staff
« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2015, 10:19:26 PM »
Good article, I would argue that SJU stayed relevant until the mid 90s. Their first losing season in 30 something years was 93-94. This might seem not picking but there is a perception that after Mullin left the program stayed irrelevant...in Reality the bottom fell out when Louie left.
Cougar O' Malley

pmg911

  • *****
  • 4073
Re: NY Times Article on Mullin & Staff
« Reply #2 on: November 13, 2015, 10:01:08 AM »
Good article, I would argue that SJU stayed relevant until the mid 90s. Their first losing season in 30 something years was 93-94. This might seem not picking but there is a perception that after Mullin left the program stayed irrelevant...in Reality the bottom fell out when Louie left.

Sorry, totally disagree...

The bottom fell out when Fr. Harrington made the unheard of move of firing a coach during the season.

The in season firing set off a series of events that would have never happened if Fr. Harrington had just waited until the end of that season.

Tha Kid

  • *****
  • 4662
Re: NY Times Article on Mullin & Staff
« Reply #3 on: November 13, 2015, 10:07:18 AM »
Good article, I would argue that SJU stayed relevant until the mid 90s. Their first losing season in 30 something years was 93-94. This might seem not picking but there is a perception that after Mullin left the program stayed irrelevant...in Reality the bottom fell out when Louie left.

Sorry, totally disagree...

The bottom fell out when Fr. Harrington made the unheard of move of firing a coach during the season.

The in season firing set off a series of events that would have never happened if Fr. Harrington had just waited until the end of that season.

+1 to PMG.  SJU may have only made the NCAA tourney once with Felipe and Zendon, but to say they were not "relevant" during that time is pretty silly.  Then they made the dance their senior year, 3 seed and Elite 8 the next year, 2 seed and 2nd round upset to the Zags the year after, Omar Cook mediocre year but got pub, Marcus Hatten #9 seed year, and then Marcus Hatten NIT title including an awesome end to the season and the memorable comeback win against Duke at MSG.  We were relevant throughout that entire period.  We may not have been as consistent a NCAA team as we were under Louie, but we were 100% absolutely relevant.

PMG is somewhat right that the first domino to fall that led us to irrelevance in the 2000s was firing Jarvis midseason.  That said, blame must be placed on the players who partook in the Pitt incident and the coaching staff who didnt properly supervise them.  Also Jarvis is to blame for some of the less than wholesome characters that he recruited...I think if we didnt have as much issues there (Grady Reynolds accusations, among other things), perhaps Fr. Harrington doesnt fire Jarvis midseason.  That said, the firing should never have happened then and the domino effect of that doomed us through the end of the Norm era.

Honestly, the Duke win and NIT title probably doomed us (unintentionally).  If not for that, gotta think Jarvis may have been canned that offseason.  Why did you have to be so damn good Marcus!! ;)
« Last Edit: November 13, 2015, 10:08:34 AM by Tha Kid »
"I drink and I know things"

nudginator59

  • *****
  • 1437
  • It's better to be a Smart ass then a Dumb shart
Re: NY Times Article on Mullin & Staff
« Reply #4 on: November 13, 2015, 11:01:20 AM »
Good article, I would argue that SJU stayed relevant until the mid 90s. Their first losing season in 30 something years was 93-94. This might seem not picking but there is a perception that after Mullin left the program stayed irrelevant...in Reality the bottom fell out when Louie left.

Sorry, totally disagree...

The bottom fell out when Fr. Harrington made the unheard of move of firing a coach during the season.

The in season firing set off a series of events that would have never happened if Fr. Harrington had just waited until the end of that season.

+1 to PMG.  SJU may have only made the NCAA tourney once with Felipe and Zendon, but to say they were not "relevant" during that time is pretty silly.  Then they made the dance their senior year, 3 seed and Elite 8 the next year, 2 seed and 2nd round upset to the Zags the year after, Omar Cook mediocre year but got pub, Marcus Hatten #9 seed year, and then Marcus Hatten NIT title including an awesome end to the season and the memorable comeback win against Duke at MSG.  We were relevant throughout that entire period.  We may not have been as consistent a NCAA team as we were under Louie, but we were 100% absolutely relevant.

PMG is somewhat right that the first domino to fall that led us to irrelevance in the 2000s was firing Jarvis midseason.  That said, blame must be placed on the players who partook in the Pitt incident and the coaching staff who didnt properly supervise them.  Also Jarvis is to blame for some of the less than wholesome characters that he recruited...I think if we didnt have as much issues there (Grady Reynolds accusations, among other things), perhaps Fr. Harrington doesnt fire Jarvis midseason.  That said, the firing should never have happened then and the domino effect of that doomed us through the end of the Norm era.

Honestly, the Duke win and NIT title probably doomed us (unintentionally).  If not for that, gotta think Jarvis may have been canned that offseason.  Why did you have to be so damn good Marcus!! ;)

How can you guys totally disagree when we are basically on the same page?

The article stated that the hey day of SJU was with Mullin and the team pretty much declined. I argued that SJU was successful and consistent until the mid 90s and started to really decline after the 93-94 season when they had their first losing season in 30 years. What you guys were saying is that SJU was really relevant until the early 2000s because of the BE championship and a run to the elite 8.

There can be an argument about that time period because of how turbulent it was. BOTH of us can agree that SJU did not fade away when Mullin left SJU. This might have been arguable the most exciting time in SJU history, but my point is that SJU was really good before Mullin and continued to be good afterword.

People have this perception that SJU was a mediocre basketball program before and after Mullin's era. My point is that we are a historically great basketball program. Is mediocre basketball the future of SJU or was it a 20 year asterisk because of the President of SJU? 


 
Cougar O' Malley

Re: NY Times Article on Mullin & Staff
« Reply #5 on: November 13, 2015, 11:33:38 AM »
Good article, I would argue that SJU stayed relevant until the mid 90s. Their first losing season in 30 something years was 93-94. This might seem not picking but there is a perception that after Mullin left the program stayed irrelevant...in Reality the bottom fell out when Louie left.

Sorry, totally disagree...

The bottom fell out when Fr. Harrington made the unheard of move of firing a coach during the season.

The in season firing set off a series of events that would have never happened if Fr. Harrington had just waited until the end of that season.

+1 to PMG.  SJU may have only made the NCAA tourney once with Felipe and Zendon, but to say they were not "relevant" during that time is pretty silly.  Then they made the dance their senior year, 3 seed and Elite 8 the next year, 2 seed and 2nd round upset to the Zags the year after, Omar Cook mediocre year but got pub, Marcus Hatten #9 seed year, and then Marcus Hatten NIT title including an awesome end to the season and the memorable comeback win against Duke at MSG.  We were relevant throughout that entire period.  We may not have been as consistent a NCAA team as we were under Louie, but we were 100% absolutely relevant.

PMG is somewhat right that the first domino to fall that led us to irrelevance in the 2000s was firing Jarvis midseason.  That said, blame must be placed on the players who partook in the Pitt incident and the coaching staff who didnt properly supervise them.  Also Jarvis is to blame for some of the less than wholesome characters that he recruited...I think if we didnt have as much issues there (Grady Reynolds accusations, among other things), perhaps Fr. Harrington doesnt fire Jarvis midseason.  That said, the firing should never have happened then and the domino effect of that doomed us through the end of the Norm era.

Honestly, the Duke win and NIT title probably doomed us (unintentionally).  If not for that, gotta think Jarvis may have been canned that offseason.  Why did you have to be so damn good Marcus!! ;)

How can you guys totally disagree when we are basically on the same page?

The article stated that the hey day of SJU was with Mullin and the team pretty much declined. I argued that SJU was successful and consistent until the mid 90s and started to really decline after the 93-94 season when they had their first losing season in 30 years. What you guys were saying is that SJU was really relevant until the early 2000s because of the BE championship and a run to the elite 8.

There can be an argument about that time period because of how turbulent it was. BOTH of us can agree that SJU did not fade away when Mullin left SJU. This might have been arguable the most exciting time in SJU history, but my point is that SJU was really good before Mullin and continued to be good afterword.

People have this perception that SJU was a mediocre basketball program before and after Mullin's era. My point is that we are a historically great basketball program. Is mediocre basketball the future of SJU or was it a 20 year asterisk because of the President of SJU? 
 
I agree with all you guys...except Lavin made us somewhat relevant over the past few years.  We were finally getting good publicity from his media friends.  Our name was out there for better more than for worse.  We began making post seasons.  Sadly, we never had a chance to make any noise...and the future didn't look any brighter.  It's also too bad all the drama ended up killing him (and us as fans). 

Mullin won't be a drama queen and he won't put up with players who are.  That's my first take on his tenure here.