(01-25-2015 07:30 PM)HMK Wrote:  Instead of comparing the CAA to the Ivy League, we need to compare JMU to ODU, GMU, and VCU. Therein lies our real peer group because we compete for state funds, media for publicity, and Virginia high school students for admission. Everyone agrees that the 3 peer schools left the CAA for higher profile leagues which gives them huge advantage for recruiting revenue and publicity . Their approach is working and it should be noted that these 3 universities are increasing in popularity and their admission standards have risen.

JMU has always promoted the athletic program as the front porch for visibility. However, the front porches of VCU (currently a top 25 in national basketball TV polls) and ODU now playing FBS (soon will be hosting VA Tech and NC State in football) have overtaken JMU for state media press coverage. Their front porches have larger columns and have been painted. Yesterday, the Fredericksburg regional newspaper had a sports front page front article with picture of about a VCU win while the JMU loss at Northeastern was a small paragraph on page 5.

JMU sports are now irrelevant in the eyes of the state media!

People will say, there is still William and Mary in the CAA and they are having a good basketball season. The fact is that W&M is not a peer state school; they could eliminate their entire sports program and remain a top academic school with admission standards that are second only to the Ivy League. Athletics is not as important to the branding of W&M as it is to JMU.

JMU is being dealt a terrible hand. It I likely that the General Assembly is going to pass a bill that will restrict our ability to use student fees to off set the cost of athletics. Because we play non revenue generating FCS football JMU will feel the restrictions more than ODU. JMU will be penalized more than any other state supported university. In addition, the presidents of the CAA have no interest in paying stipends to their basketball players to avoid having 2 classes of athletes on campus. Again, the teams in the CAA are not our competition for state funds, media coverage, and admissions. There is no way we will ever compete with our peer state universities without a level playing field.

Brady will be a convent scape goat for not producing unattainable results. Other than someone with the profile of a Lefty Driesell, no mid level coach could have taken the broken program Brady inherited and lifted it to the levels of our peer group. The fact that Brady's weakness has more to do with player relationships than actual coaching decisions confuses and complicates our problems. Brady is a good person and coach who was unlucky (in many ways) and expected to compete in the CAA while being compared to the successes of VCU and ODU.

The real issue ahead goes way beyond Brady. His fate may have already been decided. The big decisions ahead falls on President Alger and the Board of Visitors. At some point, JMU has to come to terms with the football program. Can JMU expect the mainstream fans to pay more for benefits (parking, season tickets, club seats, concessions, etc.) while playing in a lower level conference. Lets face it, we are now scheduling Elon, Albany, and Lehigh; no longer ODU, GA State, and Appalachian State. To be competitive in basketball, JMU seldom schedules basketball games in our alumni concentrated and media heavy areas of DC, Richmond, and Tidewater. At the same time trying to disguise our weak out of conference schedule by playing and being over matched by scheduling Ohio State and UVA. The sad part is that our fan base has realized that we are no longer competitive with our peer group and their lack of attendance supports the fact.

The president and the Board of Visitors can no longer sit back and pretend things will get better. The wait and see approach has run its course. Firing Brady is the easy way out. Yea, go out and hire another guy on the cheap, build him up and expect better results. In 3 years, we will be having the exact same discussion. Dillard, Keener, and Brady were not bad coaches or representatives for JMU, but their weaknesses were exploited by being placed in a situation with higher expectations than they can deliver.

As friends on the message board, we have all had disagreements and sometimes heated arguments. Regardless, our love for JMU athletics is apparent and brings us together. Our over powering desire to support JMU and our teams supersedes any disagreements. No one ever gets upset when we win.

As donors and fans it is time to provide input for OUR VISION for JMU athletics. As a goal, I would suggest that we want JMU to be placed in a position to become an equal player within our peer state schools. Now is time to let the president and the Board of Visitors know that we and will support an athletic program that has forward thinking goals.

"It's time for Alger and the BOV"...just stop right there...
"It's time for us"...We have...

I seriously think the admin is trying to figure out a way to weasel out of the "early 2015" pre-announcement.

The admin has dug a grave for the athletic department while we were forced to watch...it was like watching a car accident about to happen that bystanders could do nothing about...next comes, lies and excuses followed by no accountability accept Brady dressed in a sacrificial lamb costume.

(01-25-2015 04:55 PM)DoubleDDuke Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 04:49 PM)Hotrod829 Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 03:30 PM)PolishFalconDuke Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 09:16 AM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 08:22 AM)Dukeman Wrote:  The CAA is so bad now that the Ivy League is ranked higher; and that is without scholarships.

I think the numbers are skewed by Harvard which has been a top 50 team for the last few years. The CAA has a few top 100 teams but they don't have a team like Harvard. You don't think that there are players who go to Harvard and Princeton and Cornell that are as good or better than mid major players? Kids with means, legacies, who value the Ivy league education who know how to play at a very high level? I think Princeton's teams under Pete Carill and Bill Carmody and the Crimson team of a few years back or this latest Harvard group have proved that. It's not a discredit to the CAA but a credit to these Ivy schools and the power of playing team basketball. Don't you find it interesting that Tommy Amakers best teams have not been at Seton Hall (Big East) or Michigan (Big Ten) but his Harvard teams? That's why I think "athleticism" is overrated- team basketball you need movement, discipline, good shooting, and a guy or two who can create their own shot.

You're absolutely right, and this is pretty much why many, like me, believe it's time to move on. Brady's teams rely solely on talent. They've never had an identity offensively or defensively, never over-achieved because the way they play makes the sum of the parts better than talent level. Their success has always been based on if they can put more talented kids on the floor than the other team. Last night was one of the very few upset wins I can think of in Brady's tenure, and I don't know enough about Hofstra to determine how big of an upset it really was. I think we all want a coach in charge of the program that can get the best out of the kids he recruits, and after seven years, though the program has improved from the dark days of Sherm and Keener, it's obvious to me that Brady's not the guy to do that.

But he has won here , I dont understand how you can say that after he lead a JMU team to the NCAA's. And who is available to coach this team with enough cred to do what you ask.

Therein lies the big question. What evidence do we have to expect that we'd be able to bring in anyone better? This is not a desirable job out there. I'm sorry that there are people out there with yesteryear stuck in their brain about this program but it's not the 80s. I see no reason to believe we're going to get someone better. We play in what has become a ****** conference and are located in the valley in a dump of an arena.

That is the catch-22. The program needs an upgrade, but we're apparently unwilling (or incapable) of providing it.

(01-25-2015 06:31 PM)Purple Pilgrim Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 06:05 PM)SWVaJMUfan Wrote:  I've seen a lot of negativity about the program recently, and one of these complaints is about attendance. Why is this an issue? According to the CAA website, JMU is 2nd in the conference in attendance. Under the team stats tab and from the miscellaneous tab, there is a ranking of home attendance for each team at the bottom of the page.

SOURCE: http://www.caasports.com/stats.aspx?path...&year=2014

The negativity probably arises from (1) those of us who attended JMU when MBB was much better attended, and (2) the WBB team's attendance being greater than MBB.

The student attendance issue is one area that I am not about to lay at Brady's feet. I have been very critical of student attendance and it applies to all sports at JMU. Student attendance at football was once again rather poor last season IMO. When they did come they came late and left early. The team was good, exciting, you name it --- the product was good!!!! I am sick and tired of all the excuses for lack of student attendance and support in general --- quit making excuses for the students not showing up ----I am not sure a naked Katy Perry concert at halftime would get the students to showup and stay. The students showed strong for one game - the UVA game and that was to watch UVA NOT JMU!!!

The women's attendance is greater than the men's b/c of the support from the local community and that is IMO a Brady issue that he has brought upon himself and can be fixed by being more involved in the local community and putting a consistent winner on the floor. But I doubt that will hardly produce a bump in student attendance.

Having said that rant --- I am not directing that at ALL students and do appreciate the students the do show on a regular basis to support JMU atheltic teams. Y'all keep up the good work and bring some friends with you.

The actual men's bball team is actually somewhat good. All the advnaced metrics (Massey, Kenpom etc.) have us in the mid 100s which is far better than I think many of us thought this team was cabable of. No reason the team can't get hot again in March and win a few games in Baltimore. However, their is a general angst and apathy amongst the program. The CAA is rough to watch and most students (and alums) can't get hyped for Northeastern, Elon and Drexel no matter how good they might be. The fact remains that JMU plays mid major (small time) sports and struggles to attain the entertainment dollars and interest of students/community/alums.

This (gamer) has JMU's RPI at 143 now and has the Dukes projected to win 20....seems a bit optimistic to me at this point but it's a positive at this point.

http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_210_Men.html

There are multiple articles about the downward trend in college basketball attendance- google it.

They site factors like the time of the game, availability of games on the internet, etc. I think in JMU's case there are a variety of factors- certainly the years of being irrelevant and the lack of games against regional rivalries plays into it. A new arena would invigorate attendance- winning will gradually get the students into it. I will be interested to see the crowd for the W&M home game Saturday the day before the SuperBowl. This assumes JMU takes care of business at home on Wednesday night vs. Delaware. Like everything there is room for improvement and it's below our standards as fans and where we want the program to be but relative to other programs I'd give the attendance and general interest a C+-B.

(01-26-2015 11:31 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 06:31 PM)Purple Pilgrim Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 06:05 PM)SWVaJMUfan Wrote:  I've seen a lot of negativity about the program recently, and one of these complaints is about attendance. Why is this an issue? According to the CAA website, JMU is 2nd in the conference in attendance. Under the team stats tab and from the miscellaneous tab, there is a ranking of home attendance for each team at the bottom of the page.

SOURCE: http://www.caasports.com/stats.aspx?path...&year=2014

The negativity probably arises from (1) those of us who attended JMU when MBB was much better attended, and (2) the WBB team's attendance being greater than MBB.

The student attendance issue is one area that I am not about to lay at Brady's feet. I have been very critical of student attendance and it applies to all sports at JMU. Student attendance at football was once again rather poor last season IMO. When they did come they came late and left early. The team was good, exciting, you name it --- the product was good!!!! I am sick and tired of all the excuses for lack of student attendance and support in general --- quit making excuses for the students not showing up ----I am not sure a naked Katy Perry concert at halftime would get the students to showup and stay. The students showed strong for one game - the UVA game and that was to watch UVA NOT JMU!!!

The women's attendance is greater than the men's b/c of the support from the local community and that is IMO a Brady issue that he has brought upon himself and can be fixed by being more involved in the local community and putting a consistent winner on the floor. But I doubt that will hardly produce a bump in student attendance.

Having said that rant --- I am not directing that at ALL students and do appreciate the students the do show on a regular basis to support JMU atheltic teams. Y'all keep up the good work and bring some friends with you.

(01-25-2015 03:30 PM)PolishFalconDuke Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 09:16 AM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 08:22 AM)Dukeman Wrote:  The CAA is so bad now that the Ivy League is ranked higher; and that is without scholarships.

I think the numbers are skewed by Harvard which has been a top 50 team for the last few years. The CAA has a few top 100 teams but they don't have a team like Harvard. You don't think that there are players who go to Harvard and Princeton and Cornell that are as good or better than mid major players? Kids with means, legacies, who value the Ivy league education who know how to play at a very high level? I think Princeton's teams under Pete Carill and Bill Carmody and the Crimson team of a few years back or this latest Harvard group have proved that. It's not a discredit to the CAA but a credit to these Ivy schools and the power of playing team basketball. Don't you find it interesting that Tommy Amakers best teams have not been at Seton Hall (Big East) or Michigan (Big Ten) but his Harvard teams? That's why I think "athleticism" is overrated- team basketball you need movement, discipline, good shooting, and a guy or two who can create their own shot.

You're absolutely right, and this is pretty much why many, like me, believe it's time to move on. Brady's teams rely solely on talent. They've never had an identity offensively or defensively, never over-achieved because the way they play makes the sum of the parts better than talent level. Their success has always been based on if they can put more talented kids on the floor than the other team. Last night was one of the very few upset wins I can think of in Brady's tenure, and I don't know enough about Hofstra to determine how big of an upset it really was. I think we all want a coach in charge of the program that can get the best out of the kids he recruits, and after seven years, though the program has improved from the dark days of Sherm and Keener, it's obvious to me that Brady's not the guy to do that.

It may not work out for Brady at JMU but I don't think anyone can debate that he is a solid coach. Dillard was the sentimental hire- former star player, ties to both Campanelli and Lefty. Keener was the up and coming successful program assistant hire. Brady was somewhat established when JMU hired him. Sound Xs and Os, has turned out to be a solid recruiter. If Brady and JMU part in the future I think Matt will find another head coaching D1 job. Not knowing how the book ends I wouldn't hammer Bourne for the hire regardless of how it ends- Brady has been a solid hire by new coaching hire standards. A few post seasons- a return to the NCAA, some good moments, you can't call it a disaster like some on the board have.

I fear a new convo will generate a very temporary spike in attendance and then trail off the way things are happening at Bridgeforth. It couldn't be more simple. People just don't have interest in these opponents.

(01-26-2015 06:43 PM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 03:30 PM)PolishFalconDuke Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 09:16 AM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 08:22 AM)Dukeman Wrote:  The CAA is so bad now that the Ivy League is ranked higher; and that is without scholarships.

I think the numbers are skewed by Harvard which has been a top 50 team for the last few years. The CAA has a few top 100 teams but they don't have a team like Harvard. You don't think that there are players who go to Harvard and Princeton and Cornell that are as good or better than mid major players? Kids with means, legacies, who value the Ivy league education who know how to play at a very high level? I think Princeton's teams under Pete Carill and Bill Carmody and the Crimson team of a few years back or this latest Harvard group have proved that. It's not a discredit to the CAA but a credit to these Ivy schools and the power of playing team basketball. Don't you find it interesting that Tommy Amakers best teams have not been at Seton Hall (Big East) or Michigan (Big Ten) but his Harvard teams? That's why I think "athleticism" is overrated- team basketball you need movement, discipline, good shooting, and a guy or two who can create their own shot.

You're absolutely right, and this is pretty much why many, like me, believe it's time to move on. Brady's teams rely solely on talent. They've never had an identity offensively or defensively, never over-achieved because the way they play makes the sum of the parts better than talent level. Their success has always been based on if they can put more talented kids on the floor than the other team. Last night was one of the very few upset wins I can think of in Brady's tenure, and I don't know enough about Hofstra to determine how big of an upset it really was. I think we all want a coach in charge of the program that can get the best out of the kids he recruits, and after seven years, though the program has improved from the dark days of Sherm and Keener, it's obvious to me that Brady's not the guy to do that.

It may not work out for Brady at JMU but I don't think anyone can debate that he is a solid coach. Dillard was the sentimental hire- former star player, ties to both Campanelli and Lefty. Keener was the up and coming successful program assistant hire. Brady was somewhat established when JMU hired him. Sound Xs and Os, has turned out to be a solid recruiter. If Brady and JMU part in the future I think Matt will find another head coaching D1 job. Not knowing how the book ends I wouldn't hammer Bourne for the hire regardless of how it ends- Brady has been a solid hire by new coaching hire standards. A few post seasons- a return to the NCAA, some good moments, you can't call it a disaster like some on the board have.

You can watch his teams play and certainly debate how good of a coach he is (I personally think he's very average). That aside, I don't consider his tenure here a disaster, he's put superior talent on the floor and picked the program up from the abyss. I think it's plateaued now, and not where we hoped it would (as a mid-tier CAA program, not a perennial favorite to win the conference). I admit I'll be very interested to see what happens with him if he's not retained. How the program has been managed here has to bring some red-flags up to other schools that might consider hiring him.

(01-26-2015 10:10 PM)PolishFalconDuke Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 06:43 PM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 03:30 PM)PolishFalconDuke Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 09:16 AM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 08:22 AM)Dukeman Wrote:  The CAA is so bad now that the Ivy League is ranked higher; and that is without scholarships.

I think the numbers are skewed by Harvard which has been a top 50 team for the last few years. The CAA has a few top 100 teams but they don't have a team like Harvard. You don't think that there are players who go to Harvard and Princeton and Cornell that are as good or better than mid major players? Kids with means, legacies, who value the Ivy league education who know how to play at a very high level? I think Princeton's teams under Pete Carill and Bill Carmody and the Crimson team of a few years back or this latest Harvard group have proved that. It's not a discredit to the CAA but a credit to these Ivy schools and the power of playing team basketball. Don't you find it interesting that Tommy Amakers best teams have not been at Seton Hall (Big East) or Michigan (Big Ten) but his Harvard teams? That's why I think "athleticism" is overrated- team basketball you need movement, discipline, good shooting, and a guy or two who can create their own shot.

You're absolutely right, and this is pretty much why many, like me, believe it's time to move on. Brady's teams rely solely on talent. They've never had an identity offensively or defensively, never over-achieved because the way they play makes the sum of the parts better than talent level. Their success has always been based on if they can put more talented kids on the floor than the other team. Last night was one of the very few upset wins I can think of in Brady's tenure, and I don't know enough about Hofstra to determine how big of an upset it really was. I think we all want a coach in charge of the program that can get the best out of the kids he recruits, and after seven years, though the program has improved from the dark days of Sherm and Keener, it's obvious to me that Brady's not the guy to do that.

It may not work out for Brady at JMU but I don't think anyone can debate that he is a solid coach. Dillard was the sentimental hire- former star player, ties to both Campanelli and Lefty. Keener was the up and coming successful program assistant hire. Brady was somewhat established when JMU hired him. Sound Xs and Os, has turned out to be a solid recruiter. If Brady and JMU part in the future I think Matt will find another head coaching D1 job. Not knowing how the book ends I wouldn't hammer Bourne for the hire regardless of how it ends- Brady has been a solid hire by new coaching hire standards. A few post seasons- a return to the NCAA, some good moments, you can't call it a disaster like some on the board have.

You can watch his teams play and certainly debate how good of a coach he is (I personally think he's very average). That aside, I don't consider his tenure here a disaster, he's put superior talent on the floor and picked the program up from the abyss. I think it's plateaued now, and not where we hoped it would (as a mid-tier CAA program, not a perennial favorite to win the conference). I admit I'll be very interested to see what happens with him if he's not retained. How the program has been managed here has to bring some red-flags up to other schools that might consider hiring him.

Agree with this assessment

(01-27-2015 06:20 AM)atljmualum Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 10:10 PM)PolishFalconDuke Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 06:43 PM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 03:30 PM)PolishFalconDuke Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 09:16 AM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  I think the numbers are skewed by Harvard which has been a top 50 team for the last few years. The CAA has a few top 100 teams but they don't have a team like Harvard. You don't think that there are players who go to Harvard and Princeton and Cornell that are as good or better than mid major players? Kids with means, legacies, who value the Ivy league education who know how to play at a very high level? I think Princeton's teams under Pete Carill and Bill Carmody and the Crimson team of a few years back or this latest Harvard group have proved that. It's not a discredit to the CAA but a credit to these Ivy schools and the power of playing team basketball. Don't you find it interesting that Tommy Amakers best teams have not been at Seton Hall (Big East) or Michigan (Big Ten) but his Harvard teams? That's why I think "athleticism" is overrated- team basketball you need movement, discipline, good shooting, and a guy or two who can create their own shot.

You're absolutely right, and this is pretty much why many, like me, believe it's time to move on. Brady's teams rely solely on talent. They've never had an identity offensively or defensively, never over-achieved because the way they play makes the sum of the parts better than talent level. Their success has always been based on if they can put more talented kids on the floor than the other team. Last night was one of the very few upset wins I can think of in Brady's tenure, and I don't know enough about Hofstra to determine how big of an upset it really was. I think we all want a coach in charge of the program that can get the best out of the kids he recruits, and after seven years, though the program has improved from the dark days of Sherm and Keener, it's obvious to me that Brady's not the guy to do that.

It may not work out for Brady at JMU but I don't think anyone can debate that he is a solid coach. Dillard was the sentimental hire- former star player, ties to both Campanelli and Lefty. Keener was the up and coming successful program assistant hire. Brady was somewhat established when JMU hired him. Sound Xs and Os, has turned out to be a solid recruiter. If Brady and JMU part in the future I think Matt will find another head coaching D1 job. Not knowing how the book ends I wouldn't hammer Bourne for the hire regardless of how it ends- Brady has been a solid hire by new coaching hire standards. A few post seasons- a return to the NCAA, some good moments, you can't call it a disaster like some on the board have.

You can watch his teams play and certainly debate how good of a coach he is (I personally think he's very average). That aside, I don't consider his tenure here a disaster, he's put superior talent on the floor and picked the program up from the abyss. I think it's plateaued now, and not where we hoped it would (as a mid-tier CAA program, not a perennial favorite to win the conference). I admit I'll be very interested to see what happens with him if he's not retained. How the program has been managed here has to bring some red-flags up to other schools that might consider hiring him.

Agree with this assessment

THe way every team is winning and losing in the CAA, it is anybody's championship. We have done it before and we can do it again! Stop bashing the team and our coaches. Build them up, encourage them and cheer them on to a championship win!

(01-26-2015 07:31 PM)DoubleDDuke Wrote:  I fear a new convo will generate a very temporary spike in attendance and then trail off the way things are happening at Bridgeforth. It couldn't be more simple. People just don't have interest in these opponents.

OK, here we go again --- what opponents do you want for attendance??
-- Richmond game -- in state rival/former CAA basketball attendance was not good.
-- Valpo game --- a mid-major from a better conference that is typically good, attendance was not good.

I really don't think opponents are the driving factor in attendance issues --- unless we can lineup the top-25 for our home schedule who we play is not the problem.

Being a more consistent program will help but I keep going back to students attendance at any sporting event --- it SUCKS!!!! When a school with a 20k enrollment cannot consistently get 3-4k in students to games that is a MAJOR problem. I know JMU has tried many incentives to get the students to turnout. I appreciate those that do come --- but waaayyy too many JMU students are too wrapped up in themselves to show some school spirit and support JMU athletics. They would rather sit on their couch and text the person sitting right beside them than actually do something 'real'.

I am not sure what games you all are watching...

1. Student attendance appears to be way up this year.
2. The team is still very young (no seniors)
3. The character of Brady's recruits seems to have improved with recent classes.
4. Possibly related to 3, APR no longer appears to be a concern.
5. Other than the UVA, NE (away), and Valpo games, the team has been in every game (including OSU away) and won more away games than I expected.
6. The team's record with Nation is 5-7, 7-2 without (losses to UVA, NE away).

Depending on how UNCW eventually turns out, Brady might be CoY for the CAA. Interesting that so many want him gone...

(01-27-2015 09:14 AM)huge fan Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 06:20 AM)atljmualum Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 10:10 PM)PolishFalconDuke Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 06:43 PM)NJDuke97 Wrote:  

(01-25-2015 03:30 PM)PolishFalconDuke Wrote:  You're absolutely right, and this is pretty much why many, like me, believe it's time to move on. Brady's teams rely solely on talent. They've never had an identity offensively or defensively, never over-achieved because the way they play makes the sum of the parts better than talent level. Their success has always been based on if they can put more talented kids on the floor than the other team. Last night was one of the very few upset wins I can think of in Brady's tenure, and I don't know enough about Hofstra to determine how big of an upset it really was. I think we all want a coach in charge of the program that can get the best out of the kids he recruits, and after seven years, though the program has improved from the dark days of Sherm and Keener, it's obvious to me that Brady's not the guy to do that.

It may not work out for Brady at JMU but I don't think anyone can debate that he is a solid coach. Dillard was the sentimental hire- former star player, ties to both Campanelli and Lefty. Keener was the up and coming successful program assistant hire. Brady was somewhat established when JMU hired him. Sound Xs and Os, has turned out to be a solid recruiter. If Brady and JMU part in the future I think Matt will find another head coaching D1 job. Not knowing how the book ends I wouldn't hammer Bourne for the hire regardless of how it ends- Brady has been a solid hire by new coaching hire standards. A few post seasons- a return to the NCAA, some good moments, you can't call it a disaster like some on the board have.

You can watch his teams play and certainly debate how good of a coach he is (I personally think he's very average). That aside, I don't consider his tenure here a disaster, he's put superior talent on the floor and picked the program up from the abyss. I think it's plateaued now, and not where we hoped it would (as a mid-tier CAA program, not a perennial favorite to win the conference). I admit I'll be very interested to see what happens with him if he's not retained. How the program has been managed here has to bring some red-flags up to other schools that might consider hiring him.

Agree with this assessment

THe way every team is winning and losing in the CAA, it is anybody's championship. We have done it before and we can do it again! Stop bashing the team and our coaches. Build them up, encourage them and cheer them on to a championship win!

I am 100% convinced you are my mother-in-law. If you're not, you two should meet.

(01-27-2015 11:40 AM)Phlegmish Wrote:  I am not sure what games you all are watching...

1. Student attendance appears to be way up this year.
2. The team is still very young (no seniors)
3. The character of Brady's recruits seems to have improved with recent classes.
4. Possibly related to 3, APR no longer appears to be a concern.
5. Other than the UVA, NE (away), and Valpo games, the team has been in every game (including OSU away) and won more away games than I expected.
6. The team's record with Nation is 5-7, 7-2 without (losses to UVA, NE away).

Depending on how UNCW eventually turns out, Brady might be CoY for the CAA. Interesting that so many want him gone...

I agree with Phlegmish. Brady is not worse than whatever would be around the corner...

Brady would be a sacrifice to disappointed alum (93% of us), thrown to the wolves by the local good ol' boys in an attempt to keep the pitch forks from being pointed at the local good ol' boys.

(01-27-2015 10:15 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 07:31 PM)DoubleDDuke Wrote:  I fear a new convo will generate a very temporary spike in attendance and then trail off the way things are happening at Bridgeforth. It couldn't be more simple. People just don't have interest in these opponents.

OK, here we go again --- what opponents do you want for attendance??
-- Richmond game -- in state rival/former CAA basketball attendance was not good.
-- Valpo game --- a mid-major from a better conference that is typically good, attendance was not good.

I really don't think opponents are the driving factor in attendance issues --- unless we can lineup the top-25 for our home schedule who we play is not the problem.

Being a more consistent program will help but I keep going back to students attendance at any sporting event --- it SUCKS!!!! When a school with a 20k enrollment cannot consistently get 3-4k in students to games that is a MAJOR problem. I know JMU has tried many incentives to get the students to turnout. I appreciate those that do come --- but waaayyy too many JMU students are too wrapped up in themselves to show some school spirit and support JMU athletics. They would rather sit on their couch and text the person sitting right beside them than actually do something 'real'.

I realize we'd have to go on the road a lot to get these teams in consistently but GW, VCU, ODU, Temple, would all be intriguing off hand. Throw in an occasional UVA or Georgetown who have come fairly recently. This is assuming that we're in another conference like CUSA (which I know is a slim chance). I also realize that none of the conferences we've kicked around on here for the last couple years are exactly world beaters in hoops.

(01-27-2015 12:17 PM)DoubleDDuke Wrote:  

(01-27-2015 10:15 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 07:31 PM)DoubleDDuke Wrote:  I fear a new convo will generate a very temporary spike in attendance and then trail off the way things are happening at Bridgeforth. It couldn't be more simple. People just don't have interest in these opponents.

OK, here we go again --- what opponents do you want for attendance??
-- Richmond game -- in state rival/former CAA basketball attendance was not good.
-- Valpo game --- a mid-major from a better conference that is typically good, attendance was not good.

I really don't think opponents are the driving factor in attendance issues --- unless we can lineup the top-25 for our home schedule who we play is not the problem.

Being a more consistent program will help but I keep going back to students attendance at any sporting event --- it SUCKS!!!! When a school with a 20k enrollment cannot consistently get 3-4k in students to games that is a MAJOR problem. I know JMU has tried many incentives to get the students to turnout. I appreciate those that do come --- but waaayyy too many JMU students are too wrapped up in themselves to show some school spirit and support JMU athletics. They would rather sit on their couch and text the person sitting right beside them than actually do something 'real'.

I realize we'd have to go on the road a lot to get these teams in consistently but GW, VCU, ODU, Temple, would all be intriguing off hand. Throw in an occasional UVA or Georgetown who have come fairly recently. This is assuming that we're in another conference like CUSA (which I know is a slim chance). I also realize that none of the conferences we've kicked around on here for the last couple years are exactly world beaters in hoops.

I think we are renewing our games with Mason in the near future.....but the feeling has to be mutual and in the recent past ODU and VCU have not been interested in playing JMU. JMU can desire these matchups, but if the interest in not mutual it does not happen. Would you be willing to do 2-for-1's to get those matchups ---- I would not. ODU/VCU/GMU do not deserve 2-for-1 deals.

Back in the day JMU use to always play GW on president's day --- not sure why those stopped.

Okay, I'm a product of the Carrier / Lefty era. Perhaps my expectations are unrealistic. But here's the difference between what some are satisfied with and what I'm looking for.

Mediocrity Embracers: We're no longer at the bottom of the CAA, we're in the middle and through some luck and flukes maybe each year we have a shot at the CAA tournament and getting into the NCAA's so we can hope to win a play-in game to be a 16 seed and be nationally embarrassed.

My Expectation: The men's program should be on a level like the women's. Total domination of a sh!tty conference and borderline top 25. ESPN currently has the women's team as a NUMBER 7 seed if they win the CAA. If they don't they SHOULD most likely get in as an at-large. I can remember us losing the CAA auto-bid during the Lefty era and watching the ESPN selection show where we were right up there as contenders for an at-large bid. Dick Vitale talking about us and Lefty. We didn't get it but we were good enough to be in those national conversations.

There is NO reason Mason, ODU, VCU and Tech can have national level programs and we're still wallowing in sh!t. Except for UVA and W&M we should be on top of the friggin state, not a laughing stock. Where's your pride people? WTF???

(01-27-2015 10:15 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(01-26-2015 07:31 PM)DoubleDDuke Wrote:  I fear a new convo will generate a very temporary spike in attendance and then trail off the way things are happening at Bridgeforth. It couldn't be more simple. People just don't have interest in these opponents.

OK, here we go again --- what opponents do you want for attendance??
-- Richmond game -- in state rival/former CAA basketball attendance was not good.
-- Valpo game --- a mid-major from a better conference that is typically good, attendance was not good.

I really don't think opponents are the driving factor in attendance issues --- unless we can lineup the top-25 for our home schedule who we play is not the problem.

Being a more consistent program will help but I keep going back to students attendance at any sporting event --- it SUCKS!!!! When a school with a 20k enrollment cannot consistently get 3-4k in students to games that is a MAJOR problem. I know JMU has tried many incentives to get the students to turnout. I appreciate those that do come --- but waaayyy too many JMU students are too wrapped up in themselves to show some school spirit and support JMU athletics. They would rather sit on their couch and text the person sitting right beside them than actually do something 'real'.

I agree with this to a certain extent. The other issue is in this age of kids needing constant stimulation to keep them engaged the product needs to be fun and exciting. In addition to a winning team and playing rivals / national programs, they need more pep band and the arena putting on a show with T-shirt cannons, give-aways, shot contests, etc I think the school could create an experience that the kids would WANT to go to. Find a way to incorporate the screens they're staring at into the game real-time (social media). Make it fun and a destination and they'd come.

(01-27-2015 01:15 PM)2Buck Wrote:  I agree with this to a certain extent. The other issue is in this age of kids needing constant stimulation to keep them engaged the product needs to be fun and exciting. In addition to a winning team and playing rivals / national programs, they need more pep band and the arena putting on a show with T-shirt cannons, give-aways, shot contests, etc I think the school could create an experience that the kids would WANT to go to. Find a way to incorporate the screens they're staring at into the game real-time (social media). Make it fun and a destination and they'd come.

Have you been to a game lately? They're already doing all of this at every single home game.