Relevance anyone?

PKGW wrote:

In College, looking at only the first 2 years can be misleading. Generally, the top players were recruited by previous coach so the record does not reflect how good of a recruiter the coach was/is.

The coach’s system may not be a good fit for the previously recruited players. I think this certainly was the case for the Hobbs to Lonergan transition

On the flip side, having Yuta and Tyler as future NBA talent make MoJos number look very good although he was the least experienced of all the names.

Dude- I know you don’t like ML. That is your right and opinion. Others on the board feel differently and that is their right as well. I have no opinion either way- just a GW grad that like GW Hoops. No one is going to change any opinions. Not sure why you even listed this except to start another thread that Barry will have to move again. Please stop sparking the tinder- we all know where it will go and really there is no need for a topic such as this.

Exactly.

People need to get back to work. Employers can't find people to hire because of all the government handouts still going on (unemployment checks). One of the consequences of this is unemployed people surfing the net all day trolling all the blogs.

For those of you employed, enjoy your hard earned weekend!

It’s just a matter of what you value Rising.3.5 Trillion over 10 years to help the social safety net or
”corporate welfare” under the guise of tax cuts.And of course the bloated Pentagon budget.

Dude: you might ask GW69, but repeating yourself over and over again might be a sign of senility.

GW69 wrote:

It’s just a matter of what you value Rising.3.5 Trillion over 10 years to help the social safety net or
”corporate welfare” under the guise of tax cuts.And of course the bloated Pentagon budget.

Rampant stagflation that will ensue will erode any benefits you think will occur for the social safety net. Haven't we learned anything from Jimmy Carter? Plus with nearly 10 million jobs unfilled and social security and medicare going underwater in just a few years you'd think we'd care about that as far as shoring up the social safety net. At least military spending creates jobs even if it could be done so more efficiently. Thank God for Manchin and Sienema and I'd never thought I'd say that.

Last edited by GWRising (10/02/2021 3:13 pm)

Going from a post with a thinly disguised former-coach-bashing agenda to debating the merits on federal budget proposals in the same single page thread.
    An "Only At GW" moment.

First couple years of any coaching tenure involve getting your own recruits, developing your play style and again getting the pieces that best fit it, and adjusting to a new and in most cases higher level of competition. That's why most coaches get a 3-5 year contract. It's year 3 and forward where you can really gage the trajectory. That's why I keep saying this year will tell a lot. Something something Aaron Rodgers something something relax

Skittles wrote:

First couple years of any coaching tenure involve getting your own recruits, developing your play style and again getting the pieces that best fit it, and adjusting to a new and in most cases higher level of competition. That's why most coaches get a 3-5 year contract. It's year 3 and forward where you can really gage the trajectory. That's why I keep saying this year will tell a lot. Something something Aaron Rodgers something something relax

I would also add that this is a third year with a very huge asterisk. I’m not sure any of us fully appreciate the impact of the Covid situation on the development and performance of the team last year not to mention all the departures during and after the season. Coach was sick, players were sick, everyone was isolated, always loyal never doubting fans weren’t in the stands. I fully expect improvement this year but don’t see measuring it against other 3rd year metrics as particularly instructive. Sure would be nice for everyone to be pulling for this team without waiting to jump on their told you so opportunity.

JF, if we still had the equivalent of the "like" button, I would most definitely like your post from 10/2.

Poog gets it right as he is prone to do.  The ultimate question in my mind is to ask whether this team is moving in the right decision.  I don't base this solely on a hard and fast won loss record though winning percentage does factor into this.  Am equally interested in the following:

How does the team look on the court?  Will we continue on too many occasions to pound the ball to the point where we are taking bad shots with time running out on the shot clock?

Are players confused by their roles?

Are we running plays on offense and do we look organized on defense?

Do Freeman and Nixon look like building blocks for the future?

What does high school recruiting look like moving forward?  (I think we will need a balance of transfers and high schoolers, not a heavy emphasis on one or the other.) 

Are we winning the games that we should be winning?  (Yes, the OOC counts.)

None of this is rocket science.  From my vantage point, I saw that Gimelstob and Kuester did not elevate the program well beyond where Bob Tallent had it, but Mike Jarvis did.  Penders trajectory was straight down in years 2 and 3, Hobbs built it back up and then saw it come crashing down.  Lonergan was very much on the right track with the program while MoJo was unable to build upon this for many reasons, some of which were not his own doing.  JC has been charged with building it back up yet again, and while certain signs seem positive, the overall results have been lacking.  Progress is not that difficult to see; we just need to see some.