What if...

[OrangeDW]

Actually, he has four wins under his belt.

And he's 46, not 50.

Also, which Syracusefan poster is responsible for the introductory paragraph on his Wikipedia page...

"He is known as a real gym rat, a coach's son; the first one in the gym, last one out; and deceptively fast with a high basketball IQ.[citation needed] He plays the game the right way and gets the most out of his abilities."

LOL, identify yourself!

 

[two3zone]

First rounders?

UConn has won 3 titles since we won one. That's as relevant as how many first rounders we put into the league.

Why couldn't we get a single top 100 guy to commit to us this year if we're a top 10 program right now?

 

[two3zone]

So by your logic recruiting rankings determine the better program? May be the dumbest thing I've ever read in this board. With all that NBA talent Indiana and UCLA keep firing the coaches Why?

You brought up recruiting rankings, remember? You brought up the NBA draft, remember? You brought up attendance to determine a better program, remember?

The only thing dumb in this thread is you thinking that Syracuse is a better program than UCLA.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

UConn has won 3 titles since we won one. That's as relevant as how many first rounders we put into the league.

Why couldn't we get a single top 100 guy to commit to us this year if we're a top 10 program right now?

Wait...so "top 100 guys" recruiting class determines the better program? This is hilarious. Tyler Lydon and Tyus Battle will be off to the NBA in the next couple of year to continue our tradition of putting kids in the NBA.

Uconn ain't recruiting and they ain't winning in a crap conference. They are in trouble.

Ucla gets top 100 guys all the time, and continue to lose. Why?

 

[two3zone]

Wait...so "top 100 guys" recruiting class determines the better program? This is hilarious. Tyler Lydon and Tyus Battle will be off to the NBA in the next couple of year to continue our tradition of putting kids in the NBA.

Uconn ain't recruiting and they ain't winning in a crap conference. They are in trouble.

Ucla gets top 100 guys all the time, and continue to lose. Why?

They won 30 games this year and are a 3 seed and have a solid team coming back with great recruits. I'd rather be them than us right now.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

You brought up recruiting rankings, remember? You brought up the NBA draft, remember? You brought up attendance to determine a better program, remember?

The only thing dumb in this thread is you thinking that Syracuse is a better program than UCLA.

Again, attendance obviously matters. It makes the program. Duke has a great atmosphere despite the small crowd. Kansas has a great atmosphere because of their great crowd. Attendance matters as does atmosphere. Not sure who told you it doesn't. I didn't bring up recruiting rankings Bro. You did.

I'm still waiting for you to tell me why UCLA is a better job. It's not the consistent winning, attendance or atmosphere, right? Maybe it's all those fired coaches?

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

They won 30 games this year and are a 3 seed and have a solid team coming back with great recruits. I'd rather be them than us right now.

So you're "one year guy". We were in the Final four last year while Ucla had a losing record.

 

[OrangeDW]

You brought up recruiting rankings, remember? You brought up the NBA draft, remember? You brought up attendance to determine a better program, remember?

The only thing dumb in this thread is you thinking that Syracuse is a better program than UCLA.

For what it's worth, ESPN ran a "top 10 coaching jobs" piece in 2012 and had UCLA 4th, Indiana 5th, and Syracuse 7th. I think this discussion is splitting hairs. Both are elite bball schools and great jobs.

 

[supp]

I think both Alpharetta and two3 are right. We ain't that hot now but in any given year, it's quite possible that we could be the top job available.

 

[OrangeDW]

I think both Alpharetta and two3 are right. We ain't that hot now but in any given year, it's quite possible that we could be the top job available.

Yeah. I mean...Syracuse is a great job and yes the attendance is one of the reasons. And UCLA is a great job, and no their attendance issues don't really hurt them. Entirely different programs that are both great jobs, but have different plusses and minuses...and both have way more plusses.

 

[two3zone]

So you're "one year guy". We were in the Final four last year while Ucla had a losing record.

I would have taken a losing record this year if I knew we'd win 30 next year with a 3 seed. You'd be stupid not to. If you don't think UCLA is tending in a better direction than us then I really don't know what to tell you.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

For what it's worth, ESPN ran a "top 10 coaching jobs" piece in 2012 and had UCLA 4th, Indiana 5th, and Syracuse 7th. I think this discussion is splitting hairs. Both are elite bball schools and great jobs.

You're probably right , but deeming Syracuse as not a top 10 job based on "trending" or 1 year out of the NCAA tournament is ridiculous. Syracuse was the first team out, and that's a bad year for us. After a FF run. UCLA was 15-17 and 6-12 last year in a weak PAC 12.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

I would have taken a losing record this year if I knew we'd win 30 next year with a 3 seed. You'd be stupid not to. If you don't think UCLA is tending in a better direction than us then I really don't know what to tell you.

Kansas and Virginia won 30 games last year. I'd take our FF run over that. UCLA may not make the Sweet 16.

 

[two3zone]

Kansas and Virginia won 30 games last year. I'd take our FF run over that. UCLA may not make the Sweet 16.

We're talking now and future.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

We're talking now and future.

Oh...right now Syracuse was the first team out, and had a 10-8 record in the best conference and 18-14 record overall. Beat 3 Top 20 teams. This after last years FF run. We don't go 15-17. If we played in the PAC 12 we may have wond 23 games and been a 6 seed. Not too many good teams in that conference.

 

[SWC75]

This thread is what that "there may be more posts after this" line in the alerts is talking about.

 

[jec1521]

Team with AO, Rick, Scoop, Wes, Rautins. That's why I asked the question. That team was #1 for 6 weeks that season.

The fact that you had to ask that question is a strong indication that your understanding of the state of syracuse basketball is very weak.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

The fact that you had to ask that question is a strong indication that your understanding of the state of syracuse basketball is very weak.

Because I missed the year or the 1 game in the tournament? The point remains.

 

[jec1521]

Because I missed the year or the 1 game in the tournament? The point remains.

You missed the year, the one game in the tournament, AND your argument that there were no top 100 starters on that team. All fans. You have no point and are not well equipped with the facts, which is very clear in this entire thread.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

You missed the year, the one game in the tournament, AND your argument that there were no top 100 starters on that team. All fans. You have no point and are not well equipped with the facts, which is very clear in this entire thread.

Eh...not what I posted.

"Didn't we make the elite 8 with no top 100 kids in our starting 5 in 2009"

Triche, Rautins, Rick Jackson, Wes and AO. None were Top 1oo right? All started? 2009? We made the Sweet 16. You're splitting hairs. We were #1 for a long time that year, correct?

Try reading.

And you clearly missed the point of the post. Wanna try again?

 

[jec1521]

Eh...not what I posted.

"Didn't we make the elite 8 with no top 100 kids in our starting 5 in 2009"

Triche, Rautins, Rick Jackson, Wes and AO. None were Top 1oo right? All started? 2009? We made the Sweet 16. You're splitting hairs. We were #1 for a long time that year, correct?

Try reading.

And you clearly missed the point of the post. Wanna try again?

Jackson was top 100

 

[two3zone]

Eh...not what I posted.

"Didn't we make the elite 8 with no top 100 kids in our starting 5 in 2009"

Triche, Rautins, Rick Jackson, Wes and AO. None were Top 1oo right? All started? 2009? We made the Sweet 16. You're splitting hairs. We were #1 for a long time that year, correct?

Try reading.

And you clearly missed the point of the post. Wanna try again?

Rick Jackson was 51st. Triche was injured in high school and would have been ranked. Joseph who was the 6th man was 50th. Scoop who was a major player on that team was ranked 48th. Johnson was an honorable mention for all big 12 before he came. You want to try again?

 

[IthacaMatt]

If Boeheim wants to coach a few more years, he tells Hop, who then takes a job somewhere else... Plies his trade for a few years there, and when JB is ready, you can still give the job to Hop as long as he did well elsewhere.

It's not a bad situation for 'Cuse to be in, that's for sure. Imagine if Hop went to Cal, made the tournament a few times, deepened and re-established his California recruiting connections, then came back to take the reigns here. I'd feel far more confident in him than if he just slides up to the top spot after next year.

This wouldn't have been so bad if they had done it while Boeheim was still in his 60s. I'm feeling like the bloom is off Mike a bit, with how crappy the last couple years have been trending.

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

Jackson was top 100

https://n./content/prospects/16836

 

[AlpharettaCuse]

Jackson was top 100

Oh...Rivals had him at 103.