|
Post by bringbackcaro on May 8, 2020 12:36:53 GMT -5
Homer go loooonngggg Anyone who would take group two over group one is just refusing to take their head out of the sand Sr | Eric Green | Sr | Cullen Hamilton | Jr | Matt Husek | Jr | Robert Champion | Jr | Malachi Alexander | Jr | Anthony Thompson | Fr | Jehyve Floyd | Fr | Patrick Benzan | Fr | Open Schollie (April) | Fr | Open Schollie (April) |
VS Sr | Clayton Le Sann | Jr | Matt Faw | Jr | Connor Niego | Jr | Austin Butler | Jr | Kyle Copeland | So | Blake Verbeek | Fr | Joe Pridgen | Fr | Drew Lowder | Fr | Ryan Wade |
as suspected, nothing on the scholarship offers or anything objective other than hot air. the book is closed on the players carmody inherited and is far from closed on the hc players that nelson inherited (those that remain or transferred), and it remains to be seen how these players do at hc or elsewhere. the only objective way to evaluate the claim you made at this point in time is other scholarship offers/recruiting rankings. The floor is all yours to provide all of your objective evidence for group two. I'll have a pen and pad ready -- looking forward to hopefully learning a thing or two!
|
|
|
Post by dadominate on May 8, 2020 12:54:58 GMT -5
as suspected, nothing on the scholarship offers or anything objective other than hot air. the book is closed on the players carmody inherited and is far from closed on the hc players that nelson inherited (those that remain or transferred), and it remains to be seen how these players do at hc or elsewhere. the only objective way to evaluate the claim you made at this point in time is other scholarship offers/recruiting rankings. The floor is all yours to provide all of your objective evidence for group two. I'll have a pen and pad ready -- looking forward to hopefully learning a thing or two! i didn't claim that there was a major difference in how highly recruited one group of inherited players was versus the other... you did. there is thus no burden on me to support the null hypothesis. if you think the players carmody inherited were more highly recruited than the players nelson inherited, provide some actual evidence to support it!
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on May 8, 2020 13:20:39 GMT -5
The floor is all yours to provide all of your objective evidence for group two. I'll have a pen and pad ready -- looking forward to hopefully learning a thing or two! i didn't claim that there was a major difference in how highly recruited one group of inherited players was versus the other... you did. there is thus no burden on me to support the null hypothesis. if you think the players carmody inherited were more highly recruited than the players nelson inherited, provide some actual evidence to support it! BBC: Carmody inherited a much better hand than Nelson. 6 Juniors and Seniors who were capable of contributing + 2 open scholarships after being hired in mid-March vs 3-4 Juniors and Seniors who were capable of contributing and no ability to bring in additional players after being hired in July. I understand that you're take-committed, but it would require some serious maneuvering to position what Nelson inherited on July 3, 2019 ahead of what Carmody inherited on March 18, 2015.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on May 8, 2020 13:44:10 GMT -5
BBC, can we get you to agree with this statement I made previously?:
Just trying to find how low a bar you are setting for Coach Nelson to be deemed a "success."
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on May 8, 2020 13:56:35 GMT -5
BBC, can we get you to agree with this statement I made previously?: Just trying to find how low a bar you are setting for Coach Nelson to be deemed a "success." On the contrary, I have the bar set very high for Nelson. I am just willing to give him two years to reset the program given the total disaster that he inherited. My expectations kick in during Year 3, when we should be back in the top-half of the PL, and then beginning in Year 4 we should be competing for championships every year. Right now, I am more concerned with signing a high quality recruiting class this fall than if we win 6, 7, 8, 10, or 12 games next season.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on May 8, 2020 14:08:58 GMT -5
We may have only three scholarships next year, two if we sign anyone else for this class.
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on May 8, 2020 14:30:06 GMT -5
We may have only three scholarships next year, two if we sign anyone else for this class. This past year, quantity was extremely important to rebuild the roster. Going forward, quality will be more important that quantity, IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on May 8, 2020 14:35:09 GMT -5
We may have only three scholarships next year, two if we sign anyone else for this class. Seems like a foreign concept around here, but three is a nice number if you want to balance classes. It seems like we've been talking about balanced classes ever since O'Shea decided to transfer the same year Carver got hurt
|
|
|
Post by Tom on May 8, 2020 16:43:24 GMT -5
One huge detail left out of this equation: recruiting Milan was an exponentially better recruiter than Carmody, and therefore Carmody inherited a much better hand from MB compared to what Nelson has had to deal with from BC. another subjective - and naturally coming from you, biased/skewed - metric. on what grounds were the players that carmody inherited from brown better than the players nelson inherited from carmody? better scholarship offers? it may be true, but a comparison of the list of the players inherited that carmody inherited versus the players nelson inherited helpful to your cause and not just land this as another of a long line of biased bbc posts. I also think that Coach Brown was a better recruiter than Coach Carmody. My opinion and not meant as an indictment of Coach Carmody's recruits. - Coach Brown sent two players to the pro's (Miller and Floyd). Today I don't see any Coach Carmody recruit going pro. Obviously unfinished stories out there. I wouldn't have projected Jehyve as a pro after his soph year, so who know. Right now I see zero - totally unscientific, but I re-read the thread on our all decade team. Looking at every name thrown into the discussion, six were recruited by Coach Brown and zero by Coach Carmody.(Also 3 for Coach Willard and 1 for Coach Kearney)
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on May 8, 2020 16:57:03 GMT -5
Among those unfinished stories: Grandison, Green, Lowder, Pridgen- unfortunately all at schools not named Holy Cross
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on May 8, 2020 17:14:51 GMT -5
Let's see if any of them turn into the next Kevin Stacom.
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on May 8, 2020 19:14:48 GMT -5
as suspected, nothing on the scholarship offers or anything objective other than hot air. the book is closed on the players carmody inherited and is far from closed on the hc players that nelson inherited (those that remain or transferred), and it remains to be seen how these players do at hc or elsewhere. the only objective way to evaluate the claim you made at this point in time is other scholarship offers/recruiting rankings. The floor is all yours to provide all of your objective evidence for group two. I'll have a pen and pad ready -- looking forward to hopefully learning a thing or two! Before I pick tell me who is coaching which team Btw , if your basketball experience is what I guess it might be, coaching does matter and I think you, as close as you were to practices and game, would know
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on May 9, 2020 4:57:07 GMT -5
Your comment about coaching got me thinking efg (which can be scary in of itself): what kind of success would Coach Willard have had if he tried to play Western Kentucky style with guys like Josh Sankes, Tim Szatko, Pat Whearty, Mark Jerz, etc? It's what separates him from most of the rest of the coaches imho.
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on May 9, 2020 6:45:56 GMT -5
NAD Totally agree
First time coaches often try to change teams and force them to his/her comfort zone. Once they understand the institution, the type of players they attract(school-conference-schedule-facilities) they normally adjust or fail.
The successful coaches like George and Ralph evaluate immediately and adjust the style they will play to the roster and tweak along the way. The keep certain principles that can be adjusted each season to the roster-it keeps things fresh for them, the staff and the team.
Those experienced coaches give the roster they have every chance to compete and win games. There is little doubt in my mind both George and Ralph would have developed each player, their teams would have been well prepared for any opponent, and their teams would have enjoyed success and challenged for the title most years. Yes, and probably to the surprise of BBC, even with the roster over the last few years.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on May 9, 2020 8:44:10 GMT -5
And, of course, we all recognize the common factor with George and Ralph . . . . . . alums who lived the culture as student-athletes. This may be one of Brett's biggest hurdles.
|
|
|
Post by possum on May 9, 2020 9:21:37 GMT -5
EFG agree with you about Willard he took basically the same team after one transition year from 10-18 to 22-8. Blaney on the other hand in his first season inherited a talented roster that had a winning record the previous year and went 9-17 so he certainly didn't develop the players to be the best they could be and didn't have his team well prepared for every opponent. You can say and correctly so that there were some challenging personalities on that team but by your definition a good coach would have somehow melded them into a cohesive winning team. Blaney overcame a rocky start in his first two years at HC and proved to be a great coach hopefully Nelson can do the same.
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on May 9, 2020 9:37:16 GMT -5
The personalities are handled differently by all coaches, as we saw this season. The one center piece to George’s first season was a talent and a curse to coach and trying to make it work impacted others and the team as a whole-those directly connected to the roster could better address that situation. Your point, however, is noted, but I might suggest Ralph came to HC with years of higher level experience and adjusted, George became a great coach following that first year winning 460 games and Ralph had an incredible career as well with 336 wins.
So your choices as a coaches are Work with what you have and build/rebuild or toss your problems and start fresh immediately. The former fits Holy Cross and the toss approach resembles some P5 programs I am not rushing to embrace. As you say we all hope Nelson grows, improves and succeeds
|
|
|
Post by trimster on May 9, 2020 10:38:39 GMT -5
EFG agree with you about Willard he took basically the same team after one transition year from 10-18 to 22-8. Blaney on the other hand in his first season inherited a talented roster that had a winning record the previous year and went 9-17 so he certainly didn't develop the players to be the best they could be and didn't have his team well prepared for every opponent. You can say and correctly so that there were some challenging personalities on that team but by your definition a good coach would have somehow melded them into a cohesive winning team. Blaney overcame a rocky start in his first two years at HC and proved to be a great coach hopefully Nelson can do the same. Ralph’s record in year one or I should say his team’s record, would have been much better had the starting lineup and key reserve not been decimated by injuries. The turn around from the year before would have been very dramatic.
|
|
|
Post by possum on May 9, 2020 11:12:44 GMT -5
Don't know who was hurt on Blaney's first team Doyle, Schnurr, Grentz and Moulton played all games while Gaskins played 24, what happened year two? If Crossports was around then I'm sure the subject would have been how many games does Blaney have to win next year to keep his job, thank God for Potter and Vicens.
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on May 9, 2020 11:33:59 GMT -5
He takes the record for his loses he owns the record for all of the wins-with Potter and Vicens and afterwards. As will Nelson, and wish him great success
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on May 10, 2020 13:21:35 GMT -5
The personalities are handled differently by all coaches, as we saw this season. The one center piece to George’s first season was a talent and a curse to coach and trying to make it work impacted others and the team as a whole-those directly connected to the roster could better address that situation. Your point, however, is noted, but I might suggest Ralph came to HC with years of higher level experience and adjusted, George became a great coach following that first year winning 460 games and Ralph had an incredible career as well with 336 wins. So your choices as a coaches are Work with what you have and build/rebuild or toss your problems and start fresh immediately. The former fits Holy Cross and the toss approach resembles some P5 programs I am not rushing to embrace. As you say we all hope Nelson grows, improves and succeeds This post reminded me that both George and Ralph had the opportunity to finish their careers leading their alma mater and retire from HC if they chose to. Coach Paul Pearl probably could have retired from his alma mater, too. Are there any lessons to be learned from their departures? The programs all took a step back, at least for a while after they left.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on May 10, 2020 14:05:13 GMT -5
Very different reasons for George and Ralph George had scholarships taken away Ralph left when Pitino begged
|
|