Nova represents everything right about CBB

[Alsacs]

Hopkins was officially named coach in waiting in June 2015 to take over after the 2017-18 season, however it was no secret that he was going to be the next coach before that.
Mike Hopkins officially named Syracuse's head-coach designate


When 2 of your coaches JB and Hop are with USA Basketball in 2014 and 2016 how does that hurt when you can only have 2 coaches on the road?

It hurts when the two coaches on the road aren't getting commitments from players. I'm not saying that GMAC and Red didn't do a good job, but it's easy to look back and ask if there was anything more that JB and Hop could have done.

JB hurt recruiting in that time.
Hop was setup to fail starting next year. Hop left for Washington and boom JB became more motivated on recruiting.

This is a slipperly slope. You had a guy who was gonna retire but didn't want to retire. You had the next coach on the bench who wanted to start making decisions but in reality couldn't. Again, considering how everything played out, how could JB and Hop have handled it differently.

Good analysis.

I think JB not giving the recruiting keys to Hop was a big problem.
I just don’t think sanctions are this big reason we have fallen down.
It’s been poor roster management.

You can’t go 3 straight recruiting cycles without a top 100 PG prospect.

College basketball is mainly about guard play. We haven’t had great guard play.

 

[Alsacs]

Nova couldn't upgrade to FBS if they wanted to. You think SU is a small, private school? Nova is a tiny, private school that has little local connection given that it is not in Philly. They're exactly where they belong.

The football team is not piss poor. Sans the end of year, they played with every team on the docket. SU could not afford to pass up the ACC deal. They risked being what UConn is now; on the outside looking in and waiting for a B1G invite.

This is correct.
If we aren’t in the ACC we are UConn right now.

I get people being disappointed we aren’t one of the top dogs like we were in the Big East but Dr. Gross was smart to get us into the ACC.

 

[Alsacs]

You can compete in basketball without having a D1 football program.
Syracuse was smart to protect football.
The ACC is a hybrid of the Big East anyway.
Pittsburgh, Notre Dame, Boston College, Virginia Tech, Louisville, Miami were all places JB was familiar with.

We didn’t join the Waffle House conference it’s a Waffle House/IHOP conference.

 

[OttoMets]

So are you saying that we should minimize football and go and join the Big East. In reality, isn't it all or nothing.

That's a bizarre inference. I'm not saying that - what I said was that I agreed with your conclusion that our athletic department is better off than Villanova's as a result of the move.

But the quality of play has nothing to do with the conference. Obviously, Nova has demonstrated that it's possible to succeed at a high level playing good basketball in the Big East. But what is supposed to be the reason that going to the ACC affected Syracuse's quality of play or success? Instead of looking at Nova, we could look at Georgetown, which went from a 2-seed in the NCAA tournament the last year of the Old Big East to missing the tournament two years in a row and firing their coach. That doesn't have anything to do with the conference any more than Nova's success does, except that the Big East (like the ACC) empowers teams to succeed.

Right, I don't think quality of play is tied to the conference move. Not in any meaningful way that I can see, at least.

But the guy asked a question that I believe is legitimate though it's completely dismissed by everyone: what's the point of the conference move? I'm happy to see him ask it and think it could prompt an interesting discussion (though with the history around here, it's just as likely to bring on a bunch of "You're a dumbass, you'd rather we stayed in the Big East" replies).

 

[djcon57]

This thread has it all.

But "all" you obviously mean Alsacs and Townie hijacking yet another thread

 

[Alsacs]

But "all" you obviously mean Alsacs and Townie hijacking yet another thread

If it only was one of the 50 Trump threads where people hijack on the embrassing OT board you wouldn’t mind.

Good post.

 

[HOFCeluck]

But "all" you obviously mean Alsacs and Townie hijacking yet another thread

And H0T Takes about staying in the big east!

 

[br801]

If it only was one of the 50 Trump threads where people hijack on the embrassing OT board you wouldn’t mind.

Good post.

I'd say there's enough embarrassment to go around on all of the main boards here.

 

[Alsacs]

I'd say there's enough embarrassment to go around on all of the main boards here.

Fair assessment. I won’t fight that but I will say while sometimes I feel I may go overboard nothing I have said in this thread has been overboard or unreasonable even if people disagree which is fine.

 

[br801]

Fair assessment. I won’t fight that but I will say while sometimes I feel I may go overboard nothing I have said in this thread has been overboard or unreasonable even if people disagree which is fine.

I've seen this thread before -- passionate fans debating the same people/issues/decisions related to the program. I think they're fine and nobody is being forced to participate or even read them.

 

[Waltdods]

Right, I don't think quality of play is tied to the conference move. Not in any meaningful way that I can see, at least.

But the guy asked a question that I believe is legitimate though it's completely dismissed by everyone: what's the point of the conference move? I'm happy to see him ask it and think it could prompt an interesting discussion (though with the history around here, it's just as likely to bring on a bunch of "You're a dumbass, you'd rather we stayed in the Big East" replies).

But there really isn't anything on the other side of the argument, other than sentiment. I agree - strongly - that I wish the Big East had stayed together, and that Syracuse was still playing in the conference (whether the '80s Big East or the oughts Big East, which were two very different conferences). That was not an option. Syracuse had, in theory, three options: (1) bring hoops, football and the rest to the ACC; (2) join the Big East for basketball and drop football to 1-A (or beg some crappy conference for an associate membership); and (3) join the AAC. There just is no serious argument that makes options 2 or 3 preferable to option 1.

If you want to go back and say college sports is f'ed up, and this whole realignment game is peak f'ed up, I agree. But suggesting that Syracuse, as an individual actor in this crazy system, did anything other than pursue by far the best course of action is just totally unsupportable.

 

[tbonezone]

syracuse chose to jump to the ACC and has fallen far behind (not ahead as predicted) to VILLANOVA as a basketball program.

 

[moqui]

Sanctions aren’t why we fell. It contributed no doubt but the problems went well beyond that.

you are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts. your entire argument is willfully shading things to the negative and blatantly ignoring key facts. don't want to waste too much time on it, but just a single point for now:

Then 2014 hit and we didn’t recruit a PG till last year and Howard Washington.
Sanctions aren’t why we have gone 3 straight recruiting cycles without a PG recruit.

2014 we landed consensus #52 ranked kaleb joseph . . . . sometimes point guards don't work out (e.g., josh wright)
2015 we landed consensus #79 ranked frank howard . . . . sometimes combo guards take a while to work out as points (e.g., scoop jardine)
2016 we landed consensus #31 tyus battle, who many thought could be turned into a combo if not a full fledged point. turns out not so.

so, we actually missed one cycle - quade green - not three. and even there made a rebound to get washington

you are wedded to the idea that boeheim is past his prime. you may be right (i don't think so) but i'm not going to buy the argument when you willfully mischaracterize key facts.

i look at history: a decade ago, we had similar issues. billy edelin flamed out, josh wright was not up to the task, and we were forced to play 2 guards like gmac & devo at the point. consequently went 4 years without an ncaa tournament win, back to back nit appearances, and many in the hoi polloi were calling out jb as being past his prime and time to make the change. next thing you know, we hit our golden age.

let me be clear: i happen to believe that boeheim should have been fired after the last round of sanctions. i think the culture of the program needs to be changed. but i don't think there is strong evidence that the game has passed the man by. he remains one of the finest minds in all of college ball, and i expect the next five years will prove it.

 

[Alsacs]

you are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts. your entire argument is willfully shading things to the negative and blatantly ignoring key facts. don't want to waste too much time on it, but just a single point for now:

2014 we landed consensus #52 ranked kaleb joseph . . . . sometimes point guards don't work out (e.g., josh wright)
2015 we landed consensus #79 ranked frank howard . . . . sometimes combo guards take a while to work out as points (e.g., scoop jardine)
2016 we landed consensus #31 tyus battle, who many thought could be turned into a combo if not a full fledged point. turns out not so.

so, we actually missed one cycle - quade green - not three. and even there made a rebound to get washington

you are wedded to the idea that boeheim is past his prime. you may be right (i don't think so) but i'm not going to buy the argument when you willfully mischaracterize key facts.

i look at history: a decade ago, we had similar issues. billy edelin flamed out, josh wright was not up to the task, and we were forced to play 2 guards like gmac & devo at the point. consequently went 4 years without an ncaa tournament win, back to back nit appearances, and many in the hoi polloi were calling out jb as being past his prime and time to make the change. next thing you know, we hit our golden age.

let me be clear: i happen to believe that boeheim should have been fired after the last round of sanctions. i think the culture of the program needs to be changed. but i don't think there is strong evidence that the game has passed the man by. he remains one of the finest minds in all of college ball, and i expect the next five years will prove it.

Howard and Battle are SGs.
Not PGs.
The rest is your opinion which is fine.

 

[Alsacs]

Battle wasn’t a PG either please show me where Howard was a PG recruit?
We didn’t recruit a PG between Kaleb Joseph in 2014 and Howard Washington in 2017.

you are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts. your entire argument is willfully shading things to the negative and blatantly ignoring key facts. don't want to waste too much time on it, but just a single point for now:

2014 we landed consensus #52 ranked kaleb joseph . . . . sometimes point guards don't work out (e.g., josh wright)
2015 we landed consensus #79 ranked frank howard . . . . sometimes combo guards take a while to work out as points (e.g., scoop jardine)
2016 we landed consensus #31 tyus battle, who many thought could be turned into a combo if not a full fledged point. turns out not so.

so, we actually missed one cycle - quade green - not three. and even there made a rebound to get washington

you are wedded to the idea that boeheim is past his prime. you may be right (i don't think so) but i'm not going to buy the argument when you willfully mischaracterize key facts.

i look at history: a decade ago, we had similar issues. billy edelin flamed out, josh wright was not up to the task, and we were forced to play 2 guards like gmac & devo at the point. consequently went 4 years without an ncaa tournament win, back to back nit appearances, and many in the hoi polloi were calling out jb as being past his prime and time to make the change. next thing you know, we hit our golden age.

let me be clear: i happen to believe that boeheim should have been fired after the last round of sanctions. i think the culture of the program needs to be changed. but i don't think there is strong evidence that the game has passed the man by. he remains one of the finest minds in all of college ball, and i expect the next five years will prove it.

 

[Bayside44]

Howard and Battle are SGs.
Not PGs.
The rest is your opinion which is fine.

We've already established that Howard played a lot of PG in high school. This isn't some position change like football, he's done it before at a high level.

 

[Alsacs]

We've already established that Howard played a lot of PG in high school. This isn't some position change like football, he's done it before at a high level.

Recruiting has him as a SG and watching him play he is a SG who can fill in some as a PG but he isn’t a PG. If we recruited him to be a PG we recruited a SG to flip.

This stuff is semantics we didn’t recruit a PG for 3 recruiting classes.
Our PG play since Ennis has been people out of position and a freshman Kaleb Joseph.
PG is the most important position in college hoops.

 

[Jack Hall]

You need a new set of priorities,,,

We ll see about that in 5 - 10 years if SU bball and fball has still never been close to winning an ACC regular season or ACC tournament title.

 

[Jack Hall]

Any school president that was in Syracuse's position and didn't accept a move to the ACC should not only be fired, they should never work in college athletics again.

Yes if $$$ takes higher priority than education and winning titles, i couldnt agree more!!

 

[Bayside44]

Recruiting has him as a SG and watching him play he is a SG who can fill in some as a PG but he isn’t a PG. If we recruited him to be a PG we recruited a SG to flip.

This stuff is semantics we didn’t recruit a PG for 3 recruiting classes.
Our PG play since Ennis has been people out of position and a freshman Kaleb Joseph.
PG is the most important position in college hoops.

He came in with Malachi and then Battle next up. If anything Battle and Malachi were to be the starting guards last year and he'd come in as the 3rd G.

We have a guy here who actually went to his HS games where he ran the point. Why does this have to be debated to death? He's not Russell Westbrook we all get it.

 

[Bayside44]

We ll see about that in 5 - 10 years if SU bball and fball has still never been close to winning an ACC regular season or ACC tournament title.

I'm not sure you followed what I posted about.

 

[SoBeCuse]

We've already established that Howard played a lot of PG in high school. This isn't some position change like football, he's done it before at a high level.

A lot? I thought he played just a little occasionally at Paul IV. Pretty much only off the ball in AAU. I believe we were the only program to offer him trying to make him a PG. I could totally be wrong.

 

[Bayside44]

A lot? I thought he played just a little occasionally at Paul IV. Pretty much only off the ball in AAU. I believe we were the only program to offer him trying to make him a PG. I could totally be wrong.

I wasn't there with Mason to watch, just responding to that.

 

[tbonezone]

battle is not a point guard. he's strong and quick but lacks the finesse, awareness or perhaps even interest of getting other players involved in the offense. we saw that on the 10 second calls. also many here will never concede gerry was ever a #2. even though the "flame out " billy edelin led us to our only title . gerry is/was always a point guard to the faithful. just like they blindly perceive he's HC material now.

 

[Sherman20]

Respectfully disagree. The sanctions made early departures hurt more than they should have and there wasn't much the staff could due to alleviate that, short of getting their hands on a crystal ball or a genie lamp. Tyler Lydon was recruited to be a 4 year player (3 years at the ver very very least). He left after two. Malachi left after an awesomely average season because he happened to get hot in the tournament. Kaleb Joseph turned out to be an anxiety ridden headcase who forgot how to dribble and we couldn't recruit depth to back him up. It all adds up and it all comes back to the sanctions. The sanctions and threat of sanctions must've certainly hurt the number of interested prospects, so the coaches were working with a smaller talent pool than usual. And the restrictions on the number of coaches who could be recruiting at one time had to have hurt a lot, too.

I don't see how anything but the sanctions was the primary driver of our downfall. Take the sanctions away, and you think we'd be where we're at right now?

We missed out on Bryant and Huerter because of the sanctions. For Huerter, they didn’t have the scholarships.