|
Post by hchoops on Dec 26, 2022 22:37:32 GMT -5
Indianhoop asserted in the football thread that it was i dissent. if Colgate is not a hoops lost cause in the NCAA D1,(currently #125 in Pomeroy), I believe neither are we. Step 1 is a solid head coach. Colgate’s sole advantage as far as I can see. Step 2 is the same benefits that the school gives to football go to hoops as well. i.e. competitive assistant coach salaries; equal admissions standards(if they differ); etc.
|
|
|
Post by cmo on Dec 26, 2022 22:46:54 GMT -5
Is there a thought that football and hoops have different admission standards ?
|
|
|
Post by Ray on Dec 26, 2022 22:48:14 GMT -5
Of course not. IHoop has been hitting the eggnog too hard again.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Dec 26, 2022 23:18:52 GMT -5
My assertion is not that we don't belong in D1 for hoop.....but the task to be successful in D1 hoop, being in the PL in the year of our lord 2022, is gargantuan.
In football, we are more or less on an "even playing field" with other schools at the FCS-level...bettah than most in all honesty,
This is hardly the case in hoop...and it seems to be getting more difficult by the year in this NIL, transfer portal world.
We'll remain in the PL, TPTB like the model for the school....but men's basketball will continue to suffer in doing so.
Slainte!!!
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Dec 26, 2022 23:29:57 GMT -5
Agreeing that today’s D1 hoops world makes it difficult to compete with even the middle of D1 teams, I would be satisfied with the current ranking of 125 that Colgate has in Pomeroy, and see no reason why the 125 is not attainable for HC with the right coach.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Dec 26, 2022 23:40:41 GMT -5
It may be doable, but even if it is, where's the excitement in chanting "We're #125!!!"
We sacrificed our basketball heritage by not joining the Big East in the late 1970s. We can still be half-decent in hoop but we are now on a level, at best, with the Merrimacks, Stonehills, UMass-Lowells of the world not PC, BC and UConn.
It's difficult to get too excited about that level of a program moving forward.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Dec 26, 2022 23:49:39 GMT -5
I, and many others filling the Hart, were very excited during the Willard years even though we were not competing with former rivals. That level is still attainable. Colgate was a #14 seed in the NCAA tourney last season. (St. Peter’s was a 15). That also is attainable. The football team creates excitement beating Fordham, Buffalo, Yale and Harvard. Those type of wins, not necessarily those exact teams, are possible in hoops.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Dec 26, 2022 23:57:00 GMT -5
I, and many others filling the Hart, were very excited during the Willard years even though we were not competing with former rivals.That level is still attainable. The football team creates excitement beating Fordham, Buffalo, Yale and Harvard. Those type of wins, not necessarily those exact teams, are possible in hoops. The thing is, we kinda were then....we beat PC, BC, Notre Dame and others undah RW....that's not happening today. I just don't think that is as possible at HC 15-20 years later.....would love to be proven wrong.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Dec 27, 2022 0:02:48 GMT -5
BC is #106, Notre Dame is 163 in Pomeroy. According to that ranking, Colgate (125) is competitive with both, so could we be.
|
|
|
Post by hc87 on Dec 27, 2022 0:10:40 GMT -5
It's just a different world today....even from Ralph's last years on the Hill.
I just don't see how any coach today approximates what Willard did at HC in the early 2000s under today's rules etc...hopefully I'm wrong. We shall see....
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Dec 27, 2022 0:17:30 GMT -5
It's just a different world today....even from Ralph's last years on the Hill. I just don't see how any coach today approximates what Willard did at HC in the early 2000s under today's rules etc...hopefully I'm wrong. We shall see.... Again, Langel has come close to what we did under Willard, being competitive in some first round games and upsetting Power 6 schools. Syracuse, twice in a row. So it can be done
|
|
|
Post by bfoley82 on Dec 27, 2022 0:32:16 GMT -5
It's just a different world today....even from Ralph's last years on the Hill. I just don't see how any coach today approximates what Willard did at HC in the early 2000s under today's rules etc...hopefully I'm wrong. We shall see.... That is the best they can be. This year will mark 70 years since Holy Cross has won a NCAA tournament game. (The play-in doesn’t count)
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Dec 27, 2022 0:33:17 GMT -5
Seems simple to me: if Colgate can do it in basketball then so can we, and I’d be happy, as I think hchoops stated, with a top 125 ranking (maybe top 100 occasionally?) and PL championships.
I’ll bet that other PL schools are saying “if HC can do it in football then so can we”. Certainly Colgate, Fordham, Lehigh, maybe even Lafayette should think that
|
|
|
Post by matunuck on Dec 27, 2022 0:50:19 GMT -5
Funny reading all this after just getting back from watching Lehigh’s CJ McCollum play for the New Orleans Pelicans.
|
|
|
Post by Non Alum Dave on Dec 27, 2022 6:53:33 GMT -5
I don't know if this puts me in the '87 camp, but I must say I do wonder about the future of D1 hoops in general. At the current pace there will be over 400 teams by the end of the decade. I suppose as long as March Madness remains popular that will be the glue that keeps things together, but doesn't something have to change at some point?
For me having kids stay 4 years and graduate was always one of the biggest attractions to following HC hoops; to be able to become connected with them, in a way. Right now, out of 12 schollie players, 5 have transferred at least once, and 7 haven't. Is that going to be the norm going forward, even with a coaching change? It will be interesting to look at things in a few years, when the Covid bonus year has filtered through, and the NIL has become more established.
I too would be fine with a top 125 HC team (certainly compared to now!!!), but I do wonder about the future of the sport as we know it today.......
|
|
|
Post by trimster on Dec 27, 2022 8:10:29 GMT -5
It may be doable, but even if it is, where's the excitement in chanting "We're #125!!!" We sacrificed our basketball heritage by not joining the Big East in the late 1970s. We can still be half-decent in hoop but we are now on a level, at best, with the Merrimacks, Stonehills, UMass-Lowells of the world not PC, BC and UConn. It's difficult to get too excited about that level of a program moving forward. We are at the level of those schools today but I think with a Chesney-type at the helm, we can be in the 100-150 range. Winning basketball, even in the PL, will bring a good number of fans to the Hart Center. The problem as I see it is HC in the PL is a stepping stone for coaches, ADs and yes, players, to bigger and better things. From a coaching perspective, the school will frequently find itself looking for a Bob Chesney type coach to lead hoops and football. My last statement assumes they win here which will create a pleasant problem to have. The days of being rivals of BC, PC and UConn are long gone and never coming back.
|
|
|
Post by efg72 on Dec 27, 2022 8:11:33 GMT -5
Indianhoop asserted in the football thread that it was i dissent. if Colgate is not a hoops lost cause in the NCAA D1,(currently #125 in Pomeroy), I believe neither are we. Step 1 is a solid head coach. Colgate’s sole advantage as far as I can see. Step 2 is the same benefits that the school gives to football go to hoops as well. i.e. competitive assistant coach salaries; equal admissions standards(if they differ); etc. And that can and should be put in place before we hire the next coach
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Dec 27, 2022 8:25:33 GMT -5
I don't know if this puts me in the '87 camp, but I must say I do wonder about the future of D1 hoops in general. At the current pace there will be over 400 teams by the end of the decade. I suppose as long as March Madness remains popular that will be the glue that keeps things together, but doesn't something have to change at some point? For me having kids stay 4 years and graduate was always one of the biggest attractions to following HC hoops; to be able to become connected with them, in a way. Right now, out of 12 schollie players, 5 have transferred at least once, and 7 haven't. . True, but again, does Colgate have those same numbers ? Nelly Cummings is spending his Covid year somewhere else. Their only notable transfer is a junior, Baker, from D2 Belmont Abbey, currently averaging 13 minutes.and 7 points. That is our goal, to have a Langel type coach for whom players want to stay until they graduate. A Chesney type.
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 27, 2022 9:06:38 GMT -5
It's just a different world today....even from Ralph's last years on the Hill. I just don't see how any coach today approximates what Willard did at HC in the early 2000s under today's rules etc...hopefully I'm wrong. We shall see.... That is the best they can be. This year will mark 70 years since Holy Cross has won a NCAA tournament game. (The play-in doesn’t count) Amazing how various posters are the Judge and Jury about what Holy Cross victory counts or not. The record book says wins against D-3 opponents are wins and the record book says that Holy Cross won an NCAA game under Coach Carmody. Why not just say it's been 70 years since Holy Cross won a non-play-in round NCAA game instead of sounding like you know better than the whole NCAA?
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 27, 2022 9:08:12 GMT -5
That is the best they can be. This year will mark 70 years since Holy Cross has won a NCAA tournament game. (The play-in doesn’t count) Amazing how various posters are the Judge and Jury about what Holy Cross victory counts or not. The record book says wins against D-3 opponents are wins and the record book says that Holy Cross won an NCAA game under Coach Carmody. Why not just say it's been 70 years since Holy Cross won a non-play-in round NCAA game instead of sounding like you know better than the whole NCAA? It gets confusing when people insist their records are more official than the official ones.
|
|
|
Post by jflare on Dec 27, 2022 9:20:36 GMT -5
Of course not. IHoop has been hitting the eggnog too hard again. Totally agree. just need some work to get back to respectability and then go from there. Maybe hitting the Jack Daniel's too hard as well
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Dec 27, 2022 9:20:59 GMT -5
For me having kids stay 4 years and graduate was always one of the biggest attractions to following HC hoops; to be able to become connected with them, in a way. Right now, out of 12 schollie players, 5 have transferred at least once, and 7 haven't. Is that going to be the norm going forward, even with a coaching change? It will be interesting to look at things in a few years, when the Covid bonus year has filtered through, and the NIL has become more established. What is the probability that all seven graduate from HC? The further these kids are along in their career, the more likely they are to stay. Of the seven 3 are juniors, however, as freshmen during the "Covid" year still have two years of eligibility 2 sophs and 2 freshmen. Past practice has made me pessimistic, but I don't think it's highly probable that all four of the younger group stays, In this day and age, even schools that aren't experiencing mass exoduses probably aren't experiencing 100 percent retention The nature of looking at the current snapshot, it can only get worse. Having 7 out of these 12 graduate as four year players is a best case scenario. For this group that percentage cannot get higher, it can only get lower. Looking back four years is a completed story, but still basically as bad. Over the last four years, HC has only graduated 6 four year scholarship players. Ideally that number should be 12 or 13. Continuity would make things seem better. I have to admit it was really strange last year going to my first game and literally having zero people on the floor who I had ever seen play in person
|
|
|
Post by longsuffering on Dec 27, 2022 9:38:44 GMT -5
The sadness of HC becoming a feeder school for Community College for three (?) Players will hopefully make future players think carefully. Grandy and Luc are the only two non-grad transfers in recent years who have really improved their career by transferring.
|
|
|
Post by gks on Dec 27, 2022 10:09:48 GMT -5
Transfer rules aren't changing. Is it a part of the game that has to be dealt with.
Best way to prevent it is winning. But you need players to win and HC just doesn't have the talent. My guess is is HC is an extremely hard sell to an outstanding HS player. No consistent winning, (perceived) crappy league, and terrible game day atmosphere are tough obstacles to overcome. Why would a kid with any semblance of talent want to play in front of 150 people playing D3 schools? They all think they're AAU heroes. They think, whether justified or not, they're better than HC.
Chesney is a terrific recruiter. Was at Assumption and continues at HC. As my mother used to say he could sell ice to Eskimos. He's a rarity.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Dec 27, 2022 10:19:34 GMT -5
That is the best they can be. This year will mark 70 years since Holy Cross has won a NCAA tournament game. (The play-in doesn’t count) Amazing how various posters are the Judge and Jury about what Holy Cross victory counts or not. The record book says wins against D-3 opponents are wins and the record book says that Holy Cross won an NCAA game under Coach Carmody. Why not just say it's been 70 years since Holy Cross won a non-play-in round NCAA game instead of sounding like you know better than the whole NCAA? Right on. Want to say some games do not count? Why not say that games where the opponent has too many presbyterians don't count...or games outside of New England? The results of the games played do, of course, count as do any games played in the NCAA tournament round (even in the first round). [They are no longer called play-in games.] Or, why not say that non-D1 games don't count unless, God forbid , HC should lose one...then they will never be forgotten.
|
|