And yet they both did. Or tried.

I am confused. Will Maceo finish his degree at GW in May but no longer play? Or will he enroll at a new school for the term beginning in January, transferring his credits and playing a season and a half elsewhere? I wish him the best, he seemed to be comprable to other players who have had to deal with program instability and done well (think Sonni Holland and Chris Monroe) but I guess even Jack has his limits. Will he try to go to a "bigger" programme or pull a Marquin Chandler and become a legend at a smaller one?

In other words, there's no evidence at all, that JC was indecent, hostile, abusive to Maceo, unlike the very obvious sordid ML years, where players said they were "abused, put through hell, worst year of my life, needed counseling" and a dozen players bolted, many not because of playing time, including the most talented guys on teams, Lasan Kromah (who played a key role on a National Title team) and Kethan Savage (who helped lead Butler to the Sweet 16)

The reason it is so obvious that at least 50% of the "names" beating the same drum, because all of the "names" are 1. New, all changed from just 2 years ago 2. all take the same position 3. in the case of Maceo completely ignored him, trashed him, etc when he was an instantly useful contributor (during the fire "DBO" years) and now all are apocalytpic about a role player leaving in his last half year on a very poor at the beginning of a total rebuild so as to clamor for the firing of his successor (JC)

 

No one is trying to have the last word here. What I am trying to do is put some much needed context to this whole situation that may not be apparent in this age of unbridled speculation.

Perhaps what is missing most here is an understanding that you can't have it both ways. You can't on the one hand say we need to move the program forward and make changes and, at the same time, demand unfettered loyalty to a component of the very program you profess to be disappointed in. 

Add that to the fact that Maceo was still paying more than half the game on average. Again, this is not a case of a player who was relegated to the bench and had DNPs.

Who knows whether Maceo's willingness to remain a Colonial was motivated by loyalty or lack of options elsewhere. You would hope it was the former but last week's development certainly raises questions. Was he in it only if he could be a starter and play a certain role or was he in it for the team? I might be old school but where I come from you don't ever quit on anything mid-season once you start it unless there are extenuating circumstances such as health or a family situation. 

But the big point that gets continually overlooked is that this was Maceo's decision and his decision alone. So it didn't have to be. Tough to be sad for a guy who made his own decision and let his teammates down. I tend to be sad for guys who do the right things but have unfortunate injuries or other circumstances.
 
 

GWRising, I understand what you're saying.  You've lost me in two places:

1) While this was Maceo's decision, you write as if JC's decisions on playing time had zero influence over this decision.  If we can safely assume that Maceo would not have transferred if his playing time was say slightly less than last season, then can you understand why some feel that JC has run him off, in the figurative sense, not with his words but with his decisions about playing time?

2) Do you honestly believe that there is absolutely no difference between Maceo's situation and the freshman from Richmond's decision?  Do you really see no difference between not getting the opportunity you want vs. being demoted?  You can cling to this "playing more than half the game notion" all you want but we should both know full well that when your playing times goes from 35-36 minutes a game as  a junior to 21-22 minutes as a senior, and your starts go from 28-31 as a junior to 1-7 as a senior, it's hard not to view this as a demotion, especially when the team isn't winning as a result of the demotion. 

It's this point in particular that leads me to believe that you're in this for the last word.  Because, I truly don't see a way that you can actually believe that these two situations are the same thing.   

GWRising, this has nothing to do with my perception of things.  I was one of the few who thought Maceo should have been playing much less last season due to his defensive limitations.  

What this does have to do with is the question of whether JC forced Maceo off of the team, not in a literal sense but in a figurative one.  Your position seemed to be that Maceo came to this decision on his own and that the cuts to his playing time, cuts that were decided upon by JC, weren't so significant that it should be concluded that JC ran him off the team in any sense.  Others seem to feel that of course the cuts to his playing time represent a blow to his ego, and that this decision was what caused Maceo to transfer.

I am old school as well and believe you should finish what you start.  But that doesn't detract from the feeling that Maceo was run off of the team.

I'm a sucker for Senior Night when players get to walk the court with their parents and get a standing ovation from the home crowd so from that standpoint losing Maceo sucks. I'm sad that due to COVID Maceo was never going to get a proper Senior Night send off anyway.  For what he had to deal with he definitely deserved one.  

In terms of the debate, I can say from my own personal experience I was in line for a promotion at work only to have someone hired from outside the organization.  Did the head of the office "run me off?"  No, not exactly.  I could have totally stayed doing what I was doing before.  However, their decision made me question my assumptions about the people I was working for and eventually led me to look for a new job about 6 months later.

I don't think Maceo was unfairly treated by JC but I do find it sad that he ultimately decided his best opportunity was to leave because I always want our recruits to stay through graduation.

Last edited by GW0509 (12/28/2020 4:41 pm)

Thank you Gwmayhem-I don’t have the energy!

MG14 wrote:

GW0509 wrote:

Jon Rothstein @JonRothstein 
GW transfer Maceo Jack tells me that he's receiving interest from the following programs:
Delaware
Loyola-Chicago
UMKC
Portland
Bryant

I'm surprised he's not gaining the attention of higher caliber programs.

So, DELEWARE has beaten GW and is in the new President´s neighborhood (although GW is the President´s neighbor)
LOYOLA-CHICAGO is an NBA market and has a recent Final Four banner, but its pizza is somewhat controversial.
UMKC gets on TV from time to time but is pretty obscure although it has better BBQ than DC.
PORTLAND is an NBA market and plays in near obscurity, expect the two times a season it plays Gonzaga. But you can get better coffee in Portland than DC (so long as you have a goatee and wallet chain and ride a bike).
BRYANT unlike GW is not named after anyone famous (like former Musketeer Anita Bryant) and also plays in obscurity, albeit with less snow than DC.

Agree that he can probably do better.

Last edited by GW Alum Abroad (12/28/2020 8:47 pm)

Will he really get better looks?  I think many of you overrate him. To paraphrase LSF, the easiest player to overrate is someone who scores points on a bad team. 

What Maceo is, is an above average shooter (career 35% from 3, 86% from the line) with few other discernible skills.  He is a below average defender, not a ball handler or shot creator, and not an exceptional athlete (he’s slow). 

His offensive rating against Tier A completion was just 14.2 as a freshman, 50.8 as a sophomore, and 89.6 as a junior -all way below average (and his junior year is boosted by a good showing vs Vermont, but his Ortg was dreadful in our other 5 tier A games). . Add Tier B games, and his Ortg still tops out at 91.9 last year. 

In other words, he has demonstrated absolutely no ability to make a positive impact against highly athletic, high quality teams. He is, and always has been, a decent low-major player.

I’m bummed he’s leaving, but I would be shocked if he went to a BCS type program and made a big impact.   At best, I think it would be like Toro, as an 8 or 9th man who makes little impact.  Nelson, on the other hand, while he may be a below average offensive player, has the athleticism to play just about anywhere.


Also wanted to add, in response to this debate about whether the drop to 22 minutes a game pushed him out, I think you are all missing something.  It’s not just the drop in minutes, it’s the drop in usage with this new Bishop or one pass offense. 

Maceo’s usage rate was 18.8 as a freshman and he took 19% of the shots when he was on the floor.  As a sophomore under MoJo, he used 20.8% of possessions and took 25% of the shots when on the floor.  Last year, under JC, he used just 16.5% of possessions and took 21% of the shots.

This year, he was using only 11.2% of possessions and taking a career low 14.1% of the shots.  Granted, with fewer shots, his efficiency was sky rocketing, but it has to be frustrating for him to not get his shots even when he does play.