The first set of A10 Talk Picks can't possibly be meaningfully construed since each school's "beat writer" is predicting a record for its own team.  Predictions by nature must come from a single source or an agreed upon collaboration.  The fact that the GW writer says 6-12 for GW and the Fordham writer says 6-12 for Fordham is apples to oranges.  Maybe one is far more of a homer while the other is being as objective as possible.  I haven't done it but if you were to add up the cumulative won-loss records of all A10 schools, I'd have to believe you don't end up with a .500 record for the conference.

But again, let's just point out a simple reminder of what's happening here.  The Dude has erroneously stated that the "consensus" states that GW is headed for a 12th-13th place finish.  While some sources do have them finishing near the bottom, at least two sources we have cited have picked GW to finish in 9th place and another has them finishing in 11th place.  The Dude is big on bringing up the word facts but what really is a fact is that the word "consensus" should not be used to make his argument because quite simply, this is factually incorrect.  He has lately hitched his wagon to Torvik but as FQ correctly pointed out (beating me to this point), the computer models are largely predicated on last year's results, particularly when so many newcomers join a team as is the case with GW.  

And why does The Dude not relent?  It's to be the board contrarian.  Many here acknowledge that while JC is not going anywhere after this season, he does have some pressure to demonstrate that the trajectory of this program is moving in the right direction.  Somehow, maintaining this attitude is offensive to the Dude so he spins a narrative where JC can't fail, even with a last place finish (because isn't this what we all should have expected as he might say).

It's not much different than claiming that MoJo was in his second season as head coach when he really was in his third year as head coach.  

It's not much different than saying players like Paul Jorgensen (who transfers to Butler), Jordan Roland (who transfers and nearly leads the country in scoring), and Kevin Marfo (who transfers and does lead the country in rebounding) are terrible players because they were each Lonergan recruits who came after Kevin Sutton and Pete Strickland had left the program, implying that Lonergan had no idea how to recruit.

It's not much different than saying the bottom rung of a top 20 recruit list are the worst recruits in the school's history (as if GW has only recruited 20 players in its history).  And if we're sizing up recruits, shouldn't anyone be far more concerned with how the player panned out as a college player than his high school ratings? 

It's not much different than the guy who delights in saying that "facts are facts" states that CBS Sports has GW at #245 with no other A10 team within 45 sports of that, while in reality, La Salle sits at 219 in this same site's ranking of all programs.

I guess incorrect facts are facts too?  Maybe The Dude should stay away from facts.  They appear to be giving him a headache.   

 

Mentzinger wrote:

Torvik has us #273 and Nordlander (CBS) has us #245 so, yes, a consensus is emerging.

... one spot behind American, I might add. (Obviously the Lincoln Ball factor)
 

Mentzinger wrote:

Torvik has us #273 and Nordlander (CBS) has us #245 so, yes, a consensus is emerging.

Yep, crystal clear that it is.

As these rankings, sometimes from somewhat obscure sources, are pounded into our heads, we get it now.. If we can catch a wave and somehow ride into a tie for 14th place, that would be terrific and exceed any expectations, which we shouldn't have.
    I3th place or better would be wildly overperforming. We should have a special postseason banquet to celebrate, like the 27-3, 16-0 season. Maybe with custom made rings and trophies for everyone involved..

Also crystal clear: the annual campaign to overstate expectations so as to whine the next 6 months about "under-achievement, bad coaching decisions etc"

Harder to do facing a reality of a 273 Bart Torvik, a 245 from CBS Sports, and a program picked to finish near the very bottom of the league.  Just a clear reality.

I'd wager heavily the Coaches of the A10 pick us to finish 13th,ahead of only Fordham.  

Question is why would just be picked much HIGHER than the bottom of the pack? Is this a grand conspiracy to tamper expectations of a middling A10 program?



 

Last edited by The Dude (10/14/2021 2:49 pm)

That was a good laugh.  Dude, you really believe that some here enjoy overstating expectations so that we may eventually gripe about underachieving?  You really think that's what GW fans want, to underachieve so we can complain about it later?  I pray that this is somehow an unfunny joke because if you really do believe this, you are in need of some counseling.

Have you paid any attention to this program over the past 5 years?  I mean, ANY attention?  Happy to catch you up:

In 2016-17, MoJo abruptly received the head coaching job and his first team went 20-15 and 10-8 in the conference.  The team lost to Rider at home and coming off an NIT Championship, managed to squeak by Toledo before losing to Illinois-Chicago in the CBI.  Did I mention that two NBA players were on that roster, plus several others who play professionally?

In 2017-18, Yuta was still on the team but the trajectory of the program continued its decline.  The team went 15-18 and could not manage to avoid the play-in game at the conference tournament. 

In MoJo's final season, the team went 9-24.  Losses that season included Stony Brook at home, Siena at home (who was coached by Jamion), a 21 point loss at Princeton, and a double digit loss to Fordham.

In 2019-20, JC's initial squad managed losses to Towson, American, Morgan State, a good Vermont team but by 25 points, La Salle at home, and Fordham not once, not twice, but on three separate occasions.  That team went 12-20.

Finally, last season, the team finished 5-12 with OOC losses to Navy, Hampton, UMBC, Delaware, William & Mary, and Charlotte.

So here's what ought to be crystal clear...nobody takes any satisfaction or derives any joy from pointing out how badly the program has underachieved.  Complaints about underachieving have nothing to do with setting oversized expectations and everything to do with the fact that this program simply has underachieved over the past 5 years.  Some would say even longer, citing for example why the NIT Championship team wasn't an NCAA team.  I am not one of them; that NIT Championship looks pretty damn good right about now.  And, while I'll be the first to acknowledge that there are various talent levels among the schools I mentioned in this post, the fact is that there were days not very far ago when GW would be losing to hardly any of these schools.  Over the past five years, I'd venture to say that maybe we're around .500 in games that GW has no business losing.  That's what's referred to as underachieving.  It's not artificially setting an unrealistic expectation and then falling short of this.  Instead, it's playing seemingly annually in the play-in game.  It's losing so many games against teams from smaller conferences (and not even the very best teams within these conferences).  That's what's crystal clear to virtually everyone here who doesn't go out of their way to be a contrarian. 

Joel Joseph wrote:

The only thing that is "crystal clear" is what our GW superfan's mom is making for his Friday night dinner - meatloaf - to be served in the basement while watching Blue Bloods!

 
Easy on Blue Bloods lol, Not a bad show as long as you watch it other than on Friday nights. Never watched it until the pandemic but now have caught up. That and Curb Your Enthusiasm, Ozark, Ted Lasso and Fauda were lifesavers when sports were shut down.

Last edited by GWRising (10/14/2021 4:43 pm)

GWRising wrote:

You can all can fall for the hype, the disrespect, whatever. I can tell you for a fact that nobody at GW is paying much attention to any consensus and instead is trying to find ways to get better. We will all find out together soon whether the trajectory is going to change. All the rest is bullshit and always has been. Believe it to your peril.

It's not disrespect when you haven't finished .500 in your conference in forever, have barely got out of the qualifying round of your conference tournament, and are likely still paying your last (very successful) head coach millions to leave after he won you a national tournament because of a petulant sex cloud created by your jealous, maniac AD. Our peril is pretty fucking believable, actually. And we are very much paying attention, unfortunately for us.
 

Mentzinger wrote:

GWRising wrote:

You can all can fall for the hype, the disrespect, whatever. I can tell you for a fact that nobody at GW is paying much attention to any consensus and instead is trying to find ways to get better. We will all find out together soon whether the trajectory is going to change. All the rest is bullshit and always has been. Believe it to your peril.

It's not disrespect when you haven't finished .500 in your conference in forever, have barely got out of the qualifying round of your conference tournament, and are likely still paying your last (very successful) head coach millions to leave after he won you a national tournament because of a petulant sex cloud created by your jealous, maniac AD. Our peril is pretty fucking believable, actually. And we are very much paying attention, unfortunately for us.
 

While GW completely mishandled the ML situation, five years later I doubt that has or should have much to do with this year's predictions. Our freshmen were 13 then. 

I'm not saying it's disrespect by the way. I am saying some view it as hype and others disrespect. Doesn't matter. Preseason predictions shouldn't define this team and I would say that if we were picked first. 

The only relevant question is does this team take a step forward this year and how big a step. "Forward" is defined by the last few seasons. "Forward" is not defined against preseason predictions.

For the record, I love Blue Bloods (meatloaf, not so much). Tom Brady's ex has aged well. Since some here are out of work (and are constantly posting), I also recommend Billions, Ted Lasso, and The Wire. Dude has previously shared with us he likes Bachelor in Paradise, not my cup of tea!

Has Ziik (Brian Paul) once again changed his moniker to "Colonel"?