CSNbbs

Full Version: 2017 basketball
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
(11-02-2017 08:44 AM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-02-2017 08:39 AM)monarx Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-02-2017 08:32 AM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ][quote='jumpshooter' pid='14737265' dateline='1509628115']
Well, you said "when we aligned our resources correctly." What did you mean by that? Clearly you think they now aren't aligned properly, else you wouldn't have brought it up.
[/quote

. We are paying our coaches enough to make us TENTH in CUSA. If that is indeed all we can afford, we have serious financial problems in our athletic department.

And doing so with one of the highest athletic budgets in the conference. That brings up the question what is all the money being spent on? How how do other schools do more with less? The Ted should be close to if not completely paid for as well as the Bud and the JJarrett building. The practice facility is paid for. We don't spend much on marketing the programs or branding the facilities. We don't pay our coaches market rate. We aren't paying recruits under the table. Is it non-revenue sports? Administrative salaries?

YES. I have raised all these questions before. It just doesn't make sense to me. We seem to be sinking money into something that other schools aren't and it needs to be addressed, or we are going to struggle to compete.

To whom have you raised them? Athletic administration? The president's office? If so, you should have received an explanation. What were you told? Raising it here, in this vacuum of ignorance, accomplishes nothing.
(11-02-2017 08:51 AM)Mr.BigBlue Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-02-2017 08:18 AM)DaBigBlue Wrote: [ -> ]Our starters should be solid. Porter and Brandan need to be able to stay on the floor (fouls, conditioning & staying healthy). I think the biggest question, who of the freshmen will stand-out? One of the great things about college hoops, is watching the players develop. I think we'll be better than 4th this year.

They are both FRESHMAN....neither will standout. I suspect one if not both will be to a redshirt(s). They need it from a variety of perspectives. When you see the results of a redshirt year by Green you have to seriously consider it.

From what I have heard...neither will redshirt.
(11-02-2017 09:02 AM)jumpshooter Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-02-2017 08:44 AM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-02-2017 08:39 AM)monarx Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-02-2017 08:32 AM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ][quote='jumpshooter' pid='14737265' dateline='1509628115']
Well, you said "when we aligned our resources correctly." What did you mean by that? Clearly you think they now aren't aligned properly, else you wouldn't have brought it up.
[/quote

. We are paying our coaches enough to make us TENTH in CUSA. If that is indeed all we can afford, we have serious financial problems in our athletic department.

And doing so with one of the highest athletic budgets in the conference. That brings up the question what is all the money being spent on? How how do other schools do more with less? The Ted should be close to if not completely paid for as well as the Bud and the JJarrett building. The practice facility is paid for. We don't spend much on marketing the programs or branding the facilities. We don't pay our coaches market rate. We aren't paying recruits under the table. Is it non-revenue sports? Administrative salaries?

YES. I have raised all these questions before. It just doesn't make sense to me. We seem to be sinking money into something that other schools aren't and it needs to be addressed, or we are going to struggle to compete.

To whom have you raised them? Athletic administration? The president's office? If so, you should have received an explanation. What were you told? Raising it here, in this vacuum of ignorance, accomplishes nothing.

I don't donate enough to get a real answer. I will get some spin akin to what we read in pilot on this subject.

I have discussed the topic with one person in the AD on a personal level, not an official level, and basically gotten nothing more than a knowing smile/smirk. On the same topic that person also confirmed that there is at least some consternation about the level at which we spend, and the results that we actually get. Not sure if that is coming from donors, AD staff, or both. I don't really milk him/her for detailed info because I feel it is inappropriate to use my friendship to dig up answers to things that are not for public consumption. I am sure this is where everyone jumps on me for sharing info from unknown sources, but whatever. You asked, I answered.
Hey, at least you're honest.
ESPN has us ranked at #103 in the preseason.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...ball-1-351
(11-02-2017 08:51 AM)Mr.BigBlue Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-02-2017 08:18 AM)DaBigBlue Wrote: [ -> ]Our starters should be solid. Porter and Brandan need to be able to stay on the floor (fouls, conditioning & staying healthy). I think the biggest question, who of the freshmen will stand-out? One of the great things about college hoops, is watching the players develop. I think we'll be better than 4th this year.

They are both FRESHMAN....neither will standout. I suspect one if not both will be to a redshirt(s). They need it from a variety of perspectives. When you see the results of a redshirt year by Green you have to seriously consider it.

If the seat as hot as you guys are saying it is, there is little motivation to redshirt these guys. I guess we will find out Nov 10
(11-02-2017 10:29 AM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]ESPN has us ranked at #103 in the preseason.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...ball-1-351

C-USA teams compared to the ESPN Rankings

MTSU - 96
Old Dominion - 103
La Tech - 105
UAB - 137
UTEP - 171
Marshall - 189
Charlotte - 194
WKU - 240
UTSA - 265
FAU - 296
Southern Miss - 312
North Texas - 322
Rice - 299
FIU - 334
(11-02-2017 10:29 AM)ODUCoach Wrote: [ -> ]ESPN has us ranked at #103 in the preseason.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketb...ball-1-351

Here are our opponents ESPN rankings:

Towson - 144
JMU - 257
Temple - 60

Other Charleston Classic Teams
Auburn - 35
Indiana St - 210
Clemson - 56
Ohio - 163
Dayton - 98
Hofstra - 132

William and Mary - 177
Maryland Eastern-Shore - 313
VCU - 81
Richmond - 148
Bowling Green - 249
Fairfield - 217
Norfolk State - 288
Charlotte - 194
Rice - 299
North Texas - 322
WKU - 240
Marshall - 189
FIU - 334
FAU - 296
Charlotte - 194
MTSU - 96
UAB - 137
Southern Miss - 312
La Tech - 105
UTSA - 265
UTEP - 171
Marshall - 189
WKU - 240
FAU - 296
FIU - 334
This schedule is going to KILL our RPI.
I think our biggest game is vs Temple. We need to win that game for a Top 100 win and they could be a top 50 team at the end of the year, also beating Temple gets us a game against Auburn (most likely) which would be another Top 50 team.
phew, ya. that is a lot of high rpi teams to start the season.
(11-02-2017 11:47 AM)cmett003 Wrote: [ -> ]I think our biggest game is vs Temple. We need to win that game for a Top 100 win and they could be a top 50 team at the end of the year, also beating Temple gets us a game against Auburn (most likely) which would be another Top 50 team.

I agree. We need to get out of Charleston with 2 wins. Hopefully we can beat Temple, and get another one against Dayton, Hofstra or Ohio in game three. Beating Auburn is likely too much to ask.
(11-01-2017 02:10 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-01-2017 01:36 PM)Cyniclone Wrote: [ -> ]I'm confused about why some people seem to think losing to Towson is some sort of scarlet-letter moment. They could end up winning the CAA, and while I think conference RPI is a dodgy way to determine the quality of a conference or the difficulty in winning it, the CAA has been consistently higher in that metric than CUSA. ODU has suffered far more embarrassing losses in the past few years just in conference play.

Put another way: If ODU wins, and they should certainly expect to win at home, then there's a distinct possibility that they'll have a top-100 win on their resume. Even if it's a program that lost 41 straight a few years ago.

Because pre-BT meltdown we were at a level that we should not have lost to even a "good" Towson team. I am not willing to accept a new normal and start making comparisons based on what we are now, rather than what we have been when we aligned our resources correctly.

So other programs aren't allowed to improve? I don't get this "well, we were this good once so we should always be at LEAST that good in perpetuity and no other teams' improvements can ever be acknowledged" thing going on here.

I think if you're going to insist that ODU's best seasons are the floor for future seasons, you're going to be disappointed. Just like VCU and George Mason fans who don't understand why they're not in the Final Four every season. Programs have down stretches. Nobody's immune.
(11-02-2017 12:19 PM)Cyniclone Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-01-2017 02:10 PM)Monarchblue Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-01-2017 01:36 PM)Cyniclone Wrote: [ -> ]I'm confused about why some people seem to think losing to Towson is some sort of scarlet-letter moment. They could end up winning the CAA, and while I think conference RPI is a dodgy way to determine the quality of a conference or the difficulty in winning it, the CAA has been consistently higher in that metric than CUSA. ODU has suffered far more embarrassing losses in the past few years just in conference play.

Put another way: If ODU wins, and they should certainly expect to win at home, then there's a distinct possibility that they'll have a top-100 win on their resume. Even if it's a program that lost 41 straight a few years ago.

Because pre-BT meltdown we were at a level that we should not have lost to even a "good" Towson team. I am not willing to accept a new normal and start making comparisons based on what we are now, rather than what we have been when we aligned our resources correctly.

So other programs aren't allowed to improve? I don't get this "well, we were this good once so we should always be at LEAST that good in perpetuity and no other teams' improvements can ever be acknowledged" thing going on here.

I think if you're going to insist that ODU's best seasons are the floor for future seasons, you're going to be disappointed. Just like VCU and George Mason fans who don't understand why they're not in the Final Four every season. Programs have down stretches. Nobody's immune.

I expected for those years to at least remain the mean. Of course I understand that there will be down years from time to time, but we have been well below that mean for nearly a decade now. Do you find that acceptable? What is the definition of time to make a change?5 Years? 7 Years? 10 years? Never as long as we are as good as Towson?
In 40 years as a D-I school, we've had 10 NCAA appearances. Four of those appearances came in a seven year stretch under BT--which skews the average span between appearances.
(11-02-2017 01:08 PM)T-Mac Wrote: [ -> ]In 40 years as a D-I school, we've had 10 NCAA appearances. Four of those appearances came in a seven year stretch under BT--which skews the average span between appearances.

Count again we have had 11 NCAA appearances
My bad. Point still stands. We're not in some unprecedented slump. We had a six year slump between '86-'92 and an eight years slump between '97-'05.
(11-02-2017 12:19 PM)monarx Wrote: [ -> ]
(11-02-2017 11:47 AM)cmett003 Wrote: [ -> ]I think our biggest game is vs Temple. We need to win that game for a Top 100 win and they could be a top 50 team at the end of the year, also beating Temple gets us a game against Auburn (most likely) which would be another Top 50 team.

I agree. We need to get out of Charleston with 2 wins. Hopefully we can beat Temple, and get another one against Dayton, Hofstra or Ohio in game three. Beating Auburn is likely too much to ask.

Two of their best players are being held out of games due to the FBI investigation...Also...they're not good.
I think I'm right on this. Took Kermit Davis 7 years to get MT to the NCAAs. Here's an interesting piece on him from the Syracuse paper that tells stuff I didn't know. Perhaps you didn't, either. Also, and this may have changed, it says his salary was raised to 475K. Yeah, I cherry-picked this, but sometimes patience is what's called for, which I hope we're (admin) is exhibiting in view of the last 2 recruiting classes. Sure, put up the facilities argument, our "history," and all of that crap. Not buying it. We've had some good years, NCAA -wise; we've never been what some of you think we've been. Sorry to break the news to you.

http://www.syracuse.com/orangebasketball...es_in.html
(11-02-2017 01:48 PM)jumpshooter Wrote: [ -> ]I think I'm right on this. Took Kermit Davis 7 years to get MT to the NCAAs. Here's an interesting piece on him from the Syracuse paper that tells stuff I didn't know. Perhaps you didn't, either. Also, and this may have changed, it says his salary was raised to 475K. Yeah, I cherry-picked this, but sometimes patience is what's called for, which I hope we're (admin) is exhibiting in view of the last 2 recruiting classes. Sure, put up the facilities argument, our "history," and all of that crap. Not buying it. We've had some good years, NCAA -wise; we've never been what some of you think we've been. Sorry to break the news to you.

http://www.syracuse.com/orangebasketball...es_in.html

I don't know how old you are but most of us literally sat in the stands and watched an ODU program that was better than MTSU's current program for about an 8 year stretch. MTSU had one good year last season. The season before they were a 15 seed. They did win their 1st game in a big upset, but a 12 seed and a 15 seed isn't at the level that ODU was at in 2009-2011.
Reference URL's