|
Post by hcnation on Jan 20, 2019 12:27:10 GMT -5
Perhaps the Chesney hire (I expect he will be very successful at HC and have said so from the start) will show TPTB that the "young guy, highly successful at lower level" model can work. Of course, this won't be the first time it worked in football. Should we had hired an up and coming one in 1999
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Jan 20, 2019 12:34:09 GMT -5
Perhaps the Chesney hire (I expect he will be very successful at HC and have said so from the start) will show TPTB that the "young guy, highly successful at lower level" model can work. Of course, this won't be the first time it worked in football. Should we had hired an up and coming one in 1999 It all depends: which one??
|
|
|
Post by fillfittonfield on Jan 20, 2019 12:36:57 GMT -5
Because they for some reason are able to recruit top-level PL talent and HC cannot. Plus believe it or not PL was an upgrade for Bucknell. Not so much for the team from Worcester. Might have been a lateral move, but not an upgrade. The ECC had Hofstra, Drexel, Towson, Rider, Delaware, Lehigh, Lafaette, and Bucknell. While they gained a bit with the addition of HC and Fordham, they lost by adding weaklings Colgate and Army. And then a year later, the league added a bad Navy team. According to sports-reference.com's rankings, the ECC was the #24 conference its last year. The PL was #23 its first year and then #25 its second year. The MAAC ranked 22nd in HC's final year as a member and was 24th the year before that. Would have been a lot worse except for the great La Salle teams of that era. Earlier the ECC also had Temple, La Salle, and St. Joes, as did its predecessor the MAC. While those three teams were in it, it was virtually impossible for anyone else to compete for the auto-bid since the entire tournament was played in the Palestra each year, with refs who appeared to all be from Philly.
|
|
|
Post by fillfittonfield on Jan 20, 2019 13:08:49 GMT -5
Because they for some reason are able to recruit top-level PL talent and HC cannot. Plus believe it or not PL was an upgrade for Bucknell. Not so much for the team from Worcester. Might have been a lateral move, but not an upgrade. The ECC had Hofstra, Drexel, Towson, Rider, Delaware, Lehigh, Lafaette, and Bucknell. While they gained a bit with the addition of HC and Fordham, they lost by adding weaklings Colgate and Army. And then a year later, the league added a bad Navy team. According to sports-reference.com's rankings, the ECC was the #24 conference its last year. The PL was #23 its first year and then #25 its second year. The MAAC ranked 22nd in HC's final year as a member and was 24th the year before that. Would have been a lot worse except for the great La Salle teams of that era. Earlier the ECC also had Temple, La Salle, and St. Joes, as did its predecessor the MAC. While those three teams were in it, it was virtually impossible for anyone else to compete for the auto-bid since the entire tournament was played in the Palestra each year, with refs who appeared to all be from Philly. Mr. bison137: I appreciate your contributions to this board and enjoy your perspective and insights. In regards to your last post, I want to add some detail and context. You made the point that “earlier” the ECC has Temple, St. Joes, and LaSalle. This is correct, but I believe all 3 schools left the conference in 1982 or 1983. Bucknell was in a ECC without these schools for over 10 years before joining the PL. I bring this up not to nitpick. I tend to agree with your assessment of the ECC in relation to the MAAC and PL. With this said, I don’t think it’s fair to insinuate that Bucknell had as significant a relationship/connection to big time basketball powers in the pre PL days as Holy Cross did. A final comment. I grew up in the Philly area and was a college hoops junkie as a kid. The ECC was a Philly heavy league for a period of time. If you are insinuating, however, that Bucknell’s lack of success during their first 8 years in the ECC was because of refs and location, I think you need to take off the Orange colored glasses . Bucknell simply lost to better basketball teams who had stronger basketball pedigrees.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Jan 20, 2019 14:36:20 GMT -5
I am shocked, SHOCKED, that the same guy who defends McCarthy from purple nitpickers would imply (nay, explicitly say) that refs had a negative effect on Bucknell's fortunes in basketball. Say it ain't so, please!
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Jan 23, 2019 20:43:24 GMT -5
Waiting for @oldtakesexposed to get a hold of this thread.
|
|