|
Post by hc87 on Jan 19, 2019 22:02:34 GMT -5
It's all bs from here boys....you know it and I know it.....the HC admin cashed out on HC basketball in 1980....it's been a joke since, no offense to the guys who've played from 1980-2019 but we all know it's basically been pretend D1 basketball since 1980.
|
|
|
Post by trimster on Jan 19, 2019 22:12:37 GMT -5
It's all bs from here boys....you know it and I know it.....the HC admin cashed out on HC basketball in 1980....it's been a joke since, no offense to the guys who've played from 1980-2019 but we all know it's basically been pretend D1 basketball since 1980. The Willard era was very good but clearly an aberration.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Jan 19, 2019 22:14:38 GMT -5
We really weren't that great then either....heavens (clutching our pearls)....he lost to Williams
|
|
|
Post by thecrossisback on Jan 19, 2019 22:19:46 GMT -5
It's all bs from here boys....you know it and I know it.....the HC admin cashed out on HC basketball in 1980....it's been a joke since, no offense to the guys who've played from 1980-2019 but we all know it's basically been pretend D1 basketball since 1980. I mean Malcolm Miller is playing in the NBA, many other players are playing over seas in professional leagues. The landscape of college basketball really changed. With conferences, television, fan support and social media. HC is lacking in all of those. But that doesn't mean they can't win on the level they are on.
|
|
|
Post by trimster on Jan 19, 2019 22:20:04 GMT -5
We really weren't that great then either....heavens (clutching our pearls)....he lost to Williams RW gave HC hoops something it hadn’t had for a while and in 10 years since he left. Respect.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Jan 19, 2019 22:21:50 GMT -5
We were OK in the Willard era....a shadow of what we were in the 1970s imo though....
|
|
|
Post by thecrossisback on Jan 19, 2019 22:26:44 GMT -5
I know I want a coaching change and a league change. But that doesn't stop me from going and cheering on the team in hopes they can win the Patriot League and advance in the tournament. This loss is still frustrating me, but a couple wins in a row and we can recover.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Jan 19, 2019 22:32:35 GMT -5
LOL...there's no recovering from 2 losses in the PL....we LOST when we didn't go Big East...it all stems from that....amazed that people don't see that here.... "Yeah, if we just beat Colgate and Lafayette...." Dear God. So sad.
|
|
|
Post by thecrossisback on Jan 19, 2019 22:39:46 GMT -5
So what should we do? We can't beat Marquette and Georgetown because they are not on the scheldue. Its all about the NCAA tournament. If you make it people care. It doesn't matter where you make it from. Get in and win some games.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Jan 19, 2019 22:42:07 GMT -5
The school should seriously look at a new conference affiliation.....which it won't, but that's what it should do
|
|
|
Post by bigfan on Jan 20, 2019 8:22:35 GMT -5
We will never be good if we stay in the PL. We need to be in a better league which will help in recruiting.
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Jan 20, 2019 8:31:24 GMT -5
Why does the PL not impact Bucknell negatively? Why? Why?
|
|
|
Post by gks on Jan 20, 2019 8:52:35 GMT -5
Why does the PL not impact Bucknell negatively? Why? Why? 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.
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Jan 20, 2019 9:35:06 GMT -5
We've had a generation to adjust now. The PL could be a much stronger league with a strong HC.
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Jan 20, 2019 9:42:56 GMT -5
Outside of PC, I'm having a hard time thinking of anything accomplished by a NE D-1 program in the 70s that Bucknell hasn't accomplished.....and their gym is a lot nicer than the "arenas" of that era in NE.
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Jan 20, 2019 9:53:41 GMT -5
Having said that, I want to beat Bucknell so bad I can taste it.
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Jan 20, 2019 10:07:11 GMT -5
Why does the PL not impact Bucknell negatively? Why? Why? 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 efg72 on Jan 20, 2019 10:38:13 GMT -5
The program has been in limbo for years. There are signs of improvement in recruiting and the play of the team, but the team lacks the consistency of effort and urgency to develop we on the board and a few others would like to see.
Learning how to win takes time and there were early signs this season that progress was being made and a process was in place for this to be a strong turnaround season. If there was a match of upperclass talent and leadership on the roster perhaps this might have continued into conference play, unfortunately that individual hasn’t been identified.
Success takes time and patience and for a program looking to rebuild there will be plenty of frustrating moments like we have experienced since league play kicked off, but success will be a reality. Whether this staff gets us there or someone else benefits from their contribution is not relevant to me.
All I want is for Holy Cross to build and maintain a program in each sport and not just give us teams each year. Programs are sustainable and reload each year, similar to where Bucknell and Lehigh are in basketball and Colgate is for football. When this happens perhaps then then we can find a new conference
|
|
|
Post by hcnation on Jan 20, 2019 11:15:39 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. . Did Bucknell have a chance to reject the Big East ? The MAAC was a big step down , no better than the PL. With a downgrade like that , interest and better recruits disappeared.
|
|
|
Post by possum on Jan 20, 2019 11:18:19 GMT -5
Management is the biggest difference between HC and Bucknell. Ten years ago both schools were in a similar position with long time great coaches leaving their programs. Bucknell went outside the box by hiring a highly successful D-3 coach while HC made a disastrous hire in Kearney followed by Brown who was better but never got the program over the hump. Paulsen had a great run at Bucknell and moved to a higher level job while Brown was fired by HC. Once again Bucknell made the right decision hiring an up and coming coach from a lower level school while HC hired a 65 year old out of work volunteer assistant with a so-so track record. Until HC gets a management team in place that knows what its doing the athletic programs will continue to flounder.
|
|
|
Post by timholycross on Jan 20, 2019 11:29:05 GMT -5
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. . Did Bucknell have a chance to reject the Big East ? The MAAC was a big step down , no better than the PL. With a downgrade like that , interest and better recruits disappeared. But isn't the question at this point whether a given recruit will choose Bucknell or BU or Holy Cross, not Holy Cross or BC/PC/UConn/Umass/Northeastern? Why would an 18 year old give a hoot what type of company Holy Cross used to keep? A long winded way of saying perhaps Holy Cross is simply recruiting terribly, Charles and Cohen notwithstanding (I'll put Stevens in the camp of other kids who have gone here recently that are simply not good enough players, which has nothing to do with whether or not he screwed up, which he most certainly did). I blame Bill C for that, mostly, not totally. And like Caro and a few others if we don't see something out of these kids coming in I want a change.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Jan 20, 2019 11:29:27 GMT -5
possum nails it.
People forget, but Nathan Davis was available for hire when Pine fired Milan Brown. I recall Davis' name being thrown around as a potential candidate.
Kevin Bettencourt is a name that should be considered the next time around.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Jan 20, 2019 11:38:19 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.
|
|
|
Post by possum on Jan 20, 2019 11:43:16 GMT -5
KY agree about the Chesney hire and hope it signals a change in our approach to coaching searches.
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Jan 20, 2019 11:43:43 GMT -5
I fear our past might be clouding our memory and shaping our expectations for today. All of that is fair and just, and while the AD and Coaches are sitting in the chair and responsible, I believe the BOT deserves our scrutiny for they alone can change the commitment to athletics.
Over the years they and/or the the President have made decisions and taken actions that have ruined what was once a solid and respected basketball program. To solve the problem we need to identify the root cause. Coaches will come and go, but until the BOT is as concerned about sports as they are having a politically correct environment and a happy faculty we are asking the coaches to climb mountains.
Football appears to be moving forward and building a sustainable product for the years ahead, basketball(men and women) is moving forward, albeit slower than anybody wants, and baseball needs more investment. I can’t speak to the other programs. If we want to accelerate change, however, perhaps we need to look at the root of our concern.
|
|