|
|
Post by cfrivals on Mar 3, 2017 9:23:36 GMT -5
I was watching the Bucknell tourney and NC Asheville games form 02-03' the other night and just saw how good and loaded we once were. We were strong at every position and had a deep bench that provided lifts when needed. Or PG's had long reach and saw the floor very well as much were tremendous defenders. Our forwards were strong and aggressive both offensively and defensively. We had timely shooting on floor and had sparks coming off the bench.
Why did we lose our momentum?? I think administration can take the huge blame on that. That was the time to make a conference move or upgrade facilities. We were the top and we needed that $$ push to stay there and continue to grow.
To see where we have fallen in terms of standings, performance on the court, OOC games and recruiting over the last 9-10 years is a continuation of missed opportunity.
I think to recruit well, you need younger guys who bring excitement into the program. Do our assistants do that? not sure. Even RW lost his touch the last couple years. We need that fire back from our coaches.
I had made some comments this week and had a couple responses to "Get over it". Let me say, I have been "Getting over it" for 40 years!! I am not an alum, so I owe HC nothing!! I follow the program because I am a Worcester kid whose dad told him how great this program was and used to drop me off at the bottom of College Hill (wouldnt do that today)when I was 11 years old to go up the the Hart and get my SRO ticks to watch the great teams of the late 70's.
Things I got over:
BE decision 2x
A10 Decision 1X
Going to ECAC North Atlantic
MAAC
Dropping Schollies
PL
Not building new facility
SK, MB,
I have gotten over alot to stay following this program. With that said a ton of my fellow Worcesterites left throughout the years and well as Friends who were alums. They Got over it and moved on to other things.
It's time to see this program make strides again like in 02-03' and build on that. Right now mediocrity reigns in this whole athletic program, That needs to change!!
|
|
|
|
Post by joe on Mar 3, 2017 9:47:20 GMT -5
But we have some nice new film rooms.
|
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Mar 3, 2017 10:29:07 GMT -5
I have gotten over alot to stay following this program. With that said a ton of my fellow Worcesterites left throughout the years and well as Friends who were alums. They Got over it and moved on to other things. It's time to see this program make strides again like in 02-03' and build on that. Right now mediocrity reigns in this whole athletic program, That needs to change!! cfrivals, You have been through quite a bit and still follow HC (as, I imagine, is also true of NAD). You are exactly the type of fan that HC needs to win over with winning programs. Hang in there. |
|
|
|
Post by joe on Mar 3, 2017 10:37:53 GMT -5
Navy has a real arena. 87 million dollars later and we're still rolling out bleachers. This says a lot to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by cfrivals on Mar 3, 2017 10:59:41 GMT -5
I have gotten over alot to stay following this program. With that said a ton of my fellow Worcesterites left throughout the years and well as Friends who were alums. They Got over it and moved on to other things. It's time to see this program make strides again like in 02-03' and build on that. Right now mediocrity reigns in this whole athletic program, That needs to change!! cfrivals, You have been through quite a bit and still follow HC (as, I imagine, is also true to NAD). You are exactly the type of fan that HC needs to win over with winning programs. Hang in there. Guys like NAD, Dimarz, and my self are Dinosaurs. We used to sit with many others who have long vanished from the bleachers. I am just getting tired of the excuses and apathy that this College sends out. $95 mill, was it enough, Spent correctly, too much or too late?? I am not sure, at this point |
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Mar 3, 2017 11:14:26 GMT -5
$95 mill, was it enough, Spent correctly, too much or too late?? I am not sure, at this point Fair enough, cfr. Hopefully, we will start seeing it start to pay off as early as next season.  |
|
|
|
Post by dadominate on Mar 3, 2017 13:56:41 GMT -5
i like the concept of the 02-03 team as "the bar"... and i think it is possible for us.
02-03 was rw's 4th year at hc. bc's 4th year will be 18-19 and will feature charles(potential poy)/benzan/floyd as seniors and next year's pivotal class as sophomores.
now let's be straight about one thing, the talent that rw inherited was FAR AND AWAY superior to that which bc inherited. think about it, would you rather have pat whearty, josh sankes, ryan serravale, jared curry, et al or the mediocre (at best) talent and imbalanced classes that bc inherited?
so while rw had a major advantage in that regard, i think that it is possible. bc obviously went to the ncaa tournament in year 1 and rw did not, but rw made it in year 2 and had more talent in the stable going in to year 3.
i am confident we are back in the ncaa tournament in year 4 of the carmody era.
|
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Mar 3, 2017 15:15:59 GMT -5
i like the concept of the 02-03 team as "the bar"... and i think it is possible for us. 02-03 was rw's 4th year at hc. bc's 4th year will be 18-19 and will feature charles(potential poy)/benzan/floyd as seniors and next year's pivotal class as sophomores. now let's be straight about one thing, the talent that rw inherited was FAR AND AWAY superior to that which bc inherited. think about it, would you rather have pat whearty, josh sankes, ryan serravale, jared curry, et al or the mediocre (at best) talent and imbalanced classes that bc inherited? so while rw had a major advantage in that regard, i think that it is possible. bc obviously went to the ncaa tournament in year 1 and rw did not, but rw made it in year 2 and had more talent in the stable going in to year 3. i am confident we are back in the ncaa tournament in year 4 of the carmody era. Just to level set on those three players (who I think should develop into a very good PL nucleus), with all the talk about "shooting it better" and the need for 3-point shooters: This year: Charles: 33-88 3FG (37.5%, 1.03 3FG per game) Benzan: 8-24 3FG (33.3%, 0.25 3FG per game) Floyd: 0-1 3FG (0.0%, 0.0 3FG per game) I think the "we don't shoot it well" movement is just a convenient excuse that people like to make, and do believe that we can certainly build around these three, but if "shooting it better" is our key to success, there is limited data to suggest that these three are the answer. If we could build around these three guys going forward and play some schemes that accentuate their strengths (Benzan as a driving and distributing PG, Charles as a slasher who should be deadly coming off screens and creating mismatches posting up smaller wings, Floyd as a weapon on the offensive glass and a nightmare trying to cover rolling to the hoop after setting ball screens) then we could be in really good shape if the incoming freshmen live up to their hype. However, if we stay in the same offense, there is data to suggest that (a) our opponents have figured out how to guard these guys (Charles scored 1.2 less PPG in his Soph season compared to his Frosh, Benzan scored 9.6 PPG, making 59.6% of his FGs and scoring in double figures 6 times out of the 9 games in the first half of PL play, compared with 7.3 PPG, 43.9% FG, 2/10 in double figures in second half & PLT), or (b) the PO is not a fit for their game (Floyd has attempted 1 3FG in 647 minutes, and only had 17 offensive rebounds in 31 games this year). |
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Mar 3, 2017 15:55:28 GMT -5
2 of those 3 are limited offensively vs the many zones that we see
Changing the man.offense will.do.little to help them
|
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Mar 3, 2017 16:17:16 GMT -5
2 of those 3 are limited offensively vs the many zones that we see Changing the man.offense will.do.little to help them How about running high-low action with Charles and Floyd versus a zone? They both have the ability to make some extremely athletic plays if given space around the paint. How about increasing our tempo if teams are playing a zone against us? Benzan, Charles, and Floyd can all be extremely dangerous players in the primary and secondary breaks. Basically, my point is that we need to do better than the 4-out, lazily pass the ball around the perimeter, chuck a 3 with under 7 on the shot clock zone offense that we are currently running. |
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Mar 3, 2017 16:19:59 GMT -5
i like the concept of the 02-03 team as "the bar"... and i think it is possible for us. 02-03 was rw's 4th year at hc. bc's 4th year will be 18-19 and will feature charles(potential poy)/benzan/floyd as seniors and next year's pivotal class as sophomores. now let's be straight about one thing, the talent that rw inherited was FAR AND AWAY superior to that which bc inherited. think about it, would you rather have pat whearty, josh sankes, ryan serravale, jared curry, et al or the mediocre (at best) talent and imbalanced classes that bc inherited? so while rw had a major advantage in that regard, i think that it is possible. bc obviously went to the ncaa tournament in year 1 and rw did not, but rw made it in year 2 and had more talent in the stable going in to year 3. i am confident we are back in the ncaa tournament in year 4 of the carmody era. I agree with much of this, and while I think the short-term outlook for this roster isn't great, I also expect to see great things 2, 3, 4 years from now. Also worth noting, though, that RW did take full advantage of having scholarships in those early-aughts when most of the league did not have them. Yes, we were dominant. No, it was not a level playing field. Just another way that BC's job right now is even tougher than RW's back then. (The above is the worst thing you'll ever get me to say about RW.) |
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Mar 3, 2017 16:42:23 GMT -5
i like the concept of the 02-03 team as "the bar"... and i think it is possible for us. 02-03 was rw's 4th year at hc. bc's 4th year will be 18-19 and will feature charles(potential poy)/benzan/floyd as seniors and next year's pivotal class as sophomores. now let's be straight about one thing, the talent that rw inherited was FAR AND AWAY superior to that which bc inherited. think about it, would you rather have pat whearty, josh sankes, ryan serravale, jared curry, et al or the mediocre (at best) talent and imbalanced classes that bc inherited? so while rw had a major advantage in that regard, i think that it is possible. bc obviously went to the ncaa tournament in year 1 and rw did not, but rw made it in year 2 and had more talent in the stable going in to year 3. i am confident we are back in the ncaa tournament in year 4 of the carmody era. I agree with much of this, and while I think the short-term outlook for this roster isn't great, I also expect to see great things 2, 3, 4 years from now. Also worth noting, though, that RW did take full advantage of having scholarships in those early-aughts when most of the league did not have them. Yes, we were dominant. No, it was not a level playing field. Just another way that BC's job right now is even tougher than RW's back then. (The above is the worst thing you'll ever get me to say about RW.) RW's top competition: American with Jeff Jones -- had scholarships and I believe some shaky transfers/academics that may not quite have been up to PL standards Bucknell with Pat Flannery -- more talent in the Bettencourt-McNaughton-Lee-Brown-Badmus non-scholarship years than they have right now ***(Two top-tier coaches in PL history)Carmody's top competition: Bucknell with Nathan Davis -- talented, but not on the same level as their top teams under Flannery Lehigh with Dr. Brett Reed -- talented, but awful coaching BU with Joe Jones -- fairly talented, but poor coaching |
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Mar 3, 2017 16:49:50 GMT -5
I agree with much of this, and while I think the short-term outlook for this roster isn't great, I also expect to see great things 2, 3, 4 years from now. Also worth noting, though, that RW did take full advantage of having scholarships in those early-aughts when most of the league did not have them. Yes, we were dominant. No, it was not a level playing field. Just another way that BC's job right now is even tougher than RW's back then. (The above is the worst thing you'll ever get me to say about RW.) RW's top competition: American with Jeff Jones -- had scholarships and I believe some shaky transfers/academics that may not quite have been up to PL standards Bucknell with Pat Flannery -- more talent in the Bettencourt-McNaughton-Lee-Brown-Badmus non-scholarship years than they have right now ***(Two top-tier coaches in PL history)Carmody's top competition: Bucknell with Nathan Davis -- talented, but not on the same level as their top teams under Flannery Lehigh with Dr. Brett Reed -- talented, but awful coaching BU with Joe Jones -- fairly talented, but poor coaching 1. The Bucknell teams you refer to were 2-4 years later than the 2002-03 team being discussed. 2. The "Bettencourt-McNaughton-Lee-Brown-Badmus non-scholarship years" included two full scholarship players (McNaughton and Brown) plus another (Badmus) who was getting almost full need-based aid. 3. The current Bucknell team is not as good as the 2005-06 team but is at the same level as the 2004-05 team or the 2006-07 team. |
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Mar 3, 2017 17:01:30 GMT -5
I agree with much of this, and while I think the short-term outlook for this roster isn't great, I also expect to see great things 2, 3, 4 years from now. Also worth noting, though, that RW did take full advantage of having scholarships in those early-aughts when most of the league did not have them. Yes, we were dominant. No, it was not a level playing field. Just another way that BC's job right now is even tougher than RW's back then. (The above is the worst thing you'll ever get me to say about RW.) RW's top competition: American with Jeff Jones -- had scholarships and I believe some shaky transfers/academics that may not quite have been up to PL standards Selective memory? AU really wasn't as good as you're making them out to be. They'd be in the middle-of-the-pack in the PL in recent seasons. American under Jones from 2001 - 2007: 01-02: 18-12 (10-4) 02-03: 16-14 (9-5) 03-04: 18-13 (10-4) 04-05: 16-12 (8-6) 05-06: 12-17 (7-7) 06-07: 16-14 (7-7) Best Pomeroy ranking during this stretch was 146. American really didn't get to be good until Garrison Carr was a junior and senior. You say the PL is bad this year, then what was it from 2001 - 2006? |
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Mar 3, 2017 17:02:29 GMT -5
RW's top competition: American with Jeff Jones -- had scholarships and I believe some shaky transfers/academics that may not quite have been up to PL standards Bucknell with Pat Flannery -- more talent in the Bettencourt-McNaughton-Lee-Brown-Badmus non-scholarship years than they have right now ***(Two top-tier coaches in PL history)Carmody's top competition: Bucknell with Nathan Davis -- talented, but not on the same level as their top teams under Flannery Lehigh with Dr. Brett Reed -- talented, but awful coaching BU with Joe Jones -- fairly talented, but poor coaching 3. The current Bucknell team is not as good as the 2005-06 team but is at the same level as the 2004-05 team or the 2006-07 team. Current ranking of Bucknell, per Pomeroy, is 80. The 04-05 team was 94 and 06-07 was 98. |
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Mar 3, 2017 17:06:06 GMT -5
RW's top competition: American with Jeff Jones -- had scholarships and I believe some shaky transfers/academics that may not quite have been up to PL standards Bucknell with Pat Flannery -- more talent in the Bettencourt-McNaughton-Lee-Brown-Badmus non-scholarship years than they have right now ***(Two top-tier coaches in PL history)Carmody's top competition: Bucknell with Nathan Davis -- talented, but not on the same level as their top teams under Flannery Lehigh with Dr. Brett Reed -- talented, but awful coaching BU with Joe Jones -- fairly talented, but poor coaching 1. The Bucknell teams you refer to were 2-4 years later than the 2002-03 team being discussed. 2. The "Bettencourt-McNaughton-Lee-Brown-Badmus non-scholarship years" included two full scholarship players (McNaughton and Brown) plus another (Badmus) who was getting almost full need-based aid. 3. The current Bucknell team is not as good as the 2005-06 team but is at the same level as the 2004-05 team or the 2006-07 team.You really think the current Bucknell team & coach are capable of going into a sold out Hart Center and beating the 04-05 Kevin Hamilton/Keith Simmons/Torey Thomas led Holy Cross team that had won 16 in a row and had a top 25 defense? |
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Mar 3, 2017 17:13:56 GMT -5
RW's top competition: American with Jeff Jones -- had scholarships and I believe some shaky transfers/academics that may not quite have been up to PL standards Selective memory? AU really wasn't as good as you're making them out to be. They'd be in the middle-of-the-pack in the PL in recent seasons. American under Jones from 2001 - 2007: 01-02: 18-12 (10-4) 02-03: 16-14 (9-5) 03-04: 18-13 (10-4) 04-05: 16-12 (8-6) 05-06: 12-17 (7-7) 06-07: 16-14 (7-7) Best Pomeroy ranking during this stretch was 146. American really didn't get to be good until Garrison Carr was a junior and senior. You say the PL is bad this year, then what was it from 2001 - 2006? AU may have been a step behind the current Bucknell team, but they would have given them a damn good game. Those AU teams and Jeff Jones would win easily versus the current Lehigh and BU programs. What was the PL from 01-06? Worse at the bottom that the PL right now, with a better top 2 than right now, and 3 excellent coaches that do not exist in the league right now. |
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Mar 3, 2017 17:16:11 GMT -5
1. The Bucknell teams you refer to were 2-4 years later than the 2002-03 team being discussed. 2. The "Bettencourt-McNaughton-Lee-Brown-Badmus non-scholarship years" included two full scholarship players (McNaughton and Brown) plus another (Badmus) who was getting almost full need-based aid. 3. The current Bucknell team is not as good as the 2005-06 team but is at the same level as the 2004-05 team or the 2006-07 team.You really think the current Bucknell team & coach are capable of going into a sold out Hart Center and beating the 04-05 Kevin Hamilton/Keith Simmons/Torey Thomas led Holy Cross team that had won 16 in a row and had a top 25 defense? HC would be the favorites (like they were against Bucknell on that fateful day in March), but sure, this Bucknell team could win. That's why they play the games. Simmons and Thomas were also terrible in that game, IIRC. Hamilton nearly won the game by himself. It's too bad that 04-05 HC team didn't have a better offense. |
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Mar 3, 2017 17:24:22 GMT -5
Given the current conversation, I think it's just important to get it on the record that the Hamilton charge call was bull $h*t.
Carry on.
|
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Mar 3, 2017 17:25:07 GMT -5
1. The Bucknell teams you refer to were 2-4 years later than the 2002-03 team being discussed. 2. The "Bettencourt-McNaughton-Lee-Brown-Badmus non-scholarship years" included two full scholarship players (McNaughton and Brown) plus another (Badmus) who was getting almost full need-based aid. 3. The current Bucknell team is not as good as the 2005-06 team but is at the same level as the 2004-05 team or the 2006-07 team.You really think the current Bucknell team & coach are capable of going into a sold out Hart Center and beating the 04-05 Kevin Hamilton/Keith Simmons/Torey Thomas led Holy Cross team that had won 16 in a row and had a top 25 defense? If they played well, they'd have the same chance as the 2004-05 team. Both would be underdogs and have to play well. |
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Mar 3, 2017 17:31:13 GMT -5
Selective memory? AU really wasn't as good as you're making them out to be. They'd be in the middle-of-the-pack in the PL in recent seasons. American under Jones from 2001 - 2007: 01-02: 18-12 (10-4) 02-03: 16-14 (9-5) 03-04: 18-13 (10-4) 04-05: 16-12 (8-6) 05-06: 12-17 (7-7) 06-07: 16-14 (7-7) Best Pomeroy ranking during this stretch was 146. American really didn't get to be good until Garrison Carr was a junior and senior. You say the PL is bad this year, then what was it from 2001 - 2006? AU may have been a step behind the current Bucknell team, but they would have given them a damn good game. Those AU teams and Jeff Jones would win easily versus the current Lehigh and BU programs. What was the PL from 01-06? Worse at the bottom that the PL right now, with a better top 2 than right now, and 3 excellent coaches that do not exist in the league right now. AU in that era was much weaker than this year's Bucknell team. They played generally weak ooc schedules and beat the league's second tier teams to run up above-.500 records but they weren't strong. Their Pomeroy rankings: 2002 206th 2003 145th 2004 185th 2005 182nd 2006 256th As SOV pointed out, Bucknell currently ranks 80th. |
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Mar 3, 2017 17:34:03 GMT -5
AU may have been a step behind the current Bucknell team, but they would have given them a damn good game. Those AU teams and Jeff Jones would win easily versus the current Lehigh and BU programs. What was the PL from 01-06? Worse at the bottom that the PL right now, with a better top 2 than right now, and 3 excellent coaches that do not exist in the league right now. AU in that era was much weaker than this year's Bucknell team. They played generally weak ooc schedules and beat the league's second tier teams to run up above-.500 records but they weren't strong. Their Pomeroy rankings: 2002 206th 2003 145th 2004 185th 2005 182nd 2006 256th As SOV pointed out, Bucknell currently ranks 80th. Facts can be very dangerous things. |
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Mar 3, 2017 17:46:48 GMT -5
AU may have been a step behind the current Bucknell team, but they would have given them a damn good game. Those AU teams and Jeff Jones would win easily versus the current Lehigh and BU programs. What was the PL from 01-06? Worse at the bottom that the PL right now, with a better top 2 than right now, and 3 excellent coaches that do not exist in the league right now. AU in that era was much weaker than this year's Bucknell team. They played generally weak ooc schedules and beat the league's second tier teams to run up above-.500 records but they weren't strong. Their Pomeroy rankings: 2002 206th 2003 145th 2004 185th 2005 182nd 2006 256th As SOV pointed out, Bucknell currently ranks 80th. Sure, they're "much weaker" if you're going to robotically default to KenPom rankings. But if you're going to actually look at who shows up in the gym for the game, it would be foolish to dismiss a Jeff Jones team with guys like Stokes, Miles, and Rodriguez compared to this Bucknell team that has not been tested at all in the PL this year after coming off a 1st round exit in the PLT last year. |
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Mar 3, 2017 18:17:35 GMT -5
In terms of the talent/coaching angle of this thread, there is one thing with RW that imho separates him from CBC: RW won playing different styles, and seemed to tailor his style/philosophy around the players he inherited. Now, most everyone probably agrees a PO was not the best thing for AnT (and maybe a few others), but think about how effective Josh Sankes would have been if had to perform in the same system that RW utilized at Western Kentucky. Now, before anyone gets all hot and bothered about my mentioning AnT in the same sentence as Josh Sankes, realize that I only use the comparison to illustrate what I believe the difference is between a very good coach (CBC) and a great coach (RW).
To comment on cfrivals point about a missed opportunity, I had mentioned earlier that I felt it was a real shame that the facilities upgrades did not kick off right at the peak of the RW years. They would have aligned nicely with Keith and Torey, and Dom R's run as football QB. Who knows.
|
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Mar 3, 2017 19:06:49 GMT -5
AU in that era was much weaker than this year's Bucknell team. They played generally weak ooc schedules and beat the league's second tier teams to run up above-.500 records but they weren't strong. Their Pomeroy rankings: 2002 206th 2003 145th 2004 185th 2005 182nd 2006 256th As SOV pointed out, Bucknell currently ranks 80th. . But if you're going to actually look at who shows up in the gym for the game, it would be foolish to dismiss a Jeff Jones team with guys like Stokes, Miles, and Rodriguez compared to this Bucknell team that has not been tested at all in the PL this year after coming off a 1st round exit in the PLT last year. There's no possible way to counter any of your opinions, is there? If all the facts are against you, you just dismiss the facts, dismiss the objective measures, and imply that your opinion trumps all. I have to give you full credit: "Robotically default to KenPom rankings" is one of your best phrases yet. Just for the record: do you completely discount any objective measure of team performance such as RPI, Sagarin Rankings, and Ken Pomeroy? |
|
