2024 Offseason Grade - A minus

[spider23]

Excellent job in the portal. Mooney and staff acted so quickly to fill our spots with high level / high potential players and prospects in the portal, that we are beginning of the summer and we don't have too much to discuss or complain about - other than our usual topics.

The Grade - A minus
Why not an A, or even an A+ you might ask??
I thought a lot of our success last year came from the defensive side of the ball, especially having three strong athletic wings that could guard and grab rebounds in Dji, Bigs, and Harris. I don't think we replaced that level of defense and athleticism. Now if Tanner, or one of the freshman, or Apostolos are able to come in and provide this on the defensive end - the could be an A grade.

Guards - Lost King (considering Dji more of a wing forward) and replaced with White and GW3, to add to returning Tyne and Hunt. Added a guy with a ton of experience and skill in White, and then a guy with huge upside in GW3. I'm a big fan of Hunt and think Tyne could be very good if he just cleans up a few areas. Overall adding the two transfers gives us a really deep guard room. Hopefully one of these guys turns into a King like threat and finisher. But still like the depth and ability to run 4 of these guys at you of course of a game and even some 3 guard combos.

Forwards - Lost Bigs, Harris, Dji and Noyes. Bring in Neskovic, McGlothin, Robinson. Feel like we are going offense for defense here. A little too broad of a statement - as Bigs had huge games on offense. But we are losing some really good experience, toughness and D in Harris, Dji and Bigs. If Tanner, or Apostolos and one of the freshman can replace that we should be OK. Neskovic, I don't expect to be an all defensive team, but 6'8 with his skill level and shooting ability can be a match up problem for the other team. Again, targeted Neskovic early and ended up getting him. Nice job.
Center - Leveraged previous relationship with Beagle to keep foot in the door and strike fast. Great job. 6'10 guys that can play don't grow on trees and generally very scarce in the portal - so well done. Gives open competion with Walz. If Soulis is healthy and shows he can play, it will be a nice problem to have.

In my mind, a lot hinges on Apostolos. If he is skilled and quick enough to play the wing and play at a high level - that takes our roster to another level. I think he is most likely to be that guy on the roster. If he is not, and we struggle to find consistency and lose some ability on defense at the wing and forward, this grade could go lower.

 

[GKiller]

who has the winning the offseason gif from UR grad and former Redskins GM Bruce Allen

 

[SpiderTrap]

I really liked this offseason and work in the portal. I thought past two years was pretty good - but I was always hesitant when all of our portal transfers were guys moving up in leagues. I think to be successful - you need a combination of guys moving up and also guys from bigger programs moving down as well. And I think this year - Mooney has that. Now the 2 guys from UCONN and Michigan didn't play much, so I expect they will be hungry. If it works out and these guys find meaningful roles and show something - this could be a good sign for the future.

I would give it an A- or A.

 

[Eight Legger]

This year's crop has guys moving down, guys moving up and guys moving WAY up from D3, in addition to high school recruits. Next year, I'd like to see us add a middle-schooler and a former NBA player, k thanks.

 

[gcarter52]

This year's crop has guys moving down, guys moving up and guys moving WAY up from D3, in addition to high school recruits. Next year, I'd like to see us add a middle-schooler and a former NBA player, k thanks.

There are schools offering scholarships to middle school athletes now and in the past .

 

[AnnapSpider]

Excellent job in the portal. Mooney and staff acted so quickly to fill our spots with high level / high potential players and prospects in the portal, that we are beginning of the summer and we don't have too much to discuss or complain about - other than our usual topics.

The Grade - A minus
Why not an A, or even an A+ you might ask??
I thought a lot of our success last year came from the defensive side of the ball, especially having three strong athletic wings that could guard and grab rebounds in Dji, Bigs, and Harris. I don't think we replaced that level of defense and athleticism. Now if Tanner, or one of the freshman, or Apostolos are able to come in and provide this on the defensive end - the could be an A grade.

Guards - Lost King (considering Dji more of a wing forward) and replaced with White and GW3, to add to returning Tyne and Hunt. Added a guy with a ton of experience and skill in White, and then a guy with huge upside in GW3. I'm a big fan of Hunt and think Tyne could be very good if he just cleans up a few areas. Overall adding the two transfers gives us a really deep guard room. Hopefully one of these guys turns into a King like threat and finisher. But still like the depth and ability to run 4 of these guys at you of course of a game and even some 3 guard combos.

Forwards - Lost Bigs, Harris, Dji and Noyes. Bring in Neskovic, McGlothin, Robinson. Feel like we are going offense for defense here. A little too broad of a statement - as Bigs had huge games on offense. But we are losing some really good experience, toughness and D in Harris, Dji and Bigs. If Tanner, or Apostolos and one of the freshman can replace that we should be OK. Neskovic, I don't expect to be an all defensive team, but 6'8 with his skill level and shooting ability can be a match up problem for the other team. Again, targeted Neskovic early and ended up getting him. Nice job.
Center - Leveraged previous relationship with Beagle to keep foot in the door and strike fast. Great job. 6'10 guys that can play don't grow on trees and generally very scarce in the portal - so well done. Gives open competion with Walz. If Soulis is healthy and shows he can play, it will be a nice problem to have.

In my mind, a lot hinges on Apostolos. If he is skilled and quick enough to play the wing and play at a high level - that takes our roster to another level. I think he is most likely to be that guy on the roster. If he is not, and we struggle to find consistency and lose some ability on defense at the wing and forward, this grade could go lower.

Yes, this me giving you an A for your grading. (Put it on your calendar) LOL
I think that the fact that Apostolos had a year, hurt or not, was positive.
I’m sure they had him in weight room and doing whatever he could to
bulk up for D-1 ball. Now let’s hope in translate into his play.

 

[SpiderTrap]

The key this year and any year moving forward with the portal is how quickly can all these pieces fit together and understand their roles. Much easier these days since they can practice together in the summer. But this is what hurt us last year - we did not hit our stride until A10 play. Therefore - the poor OOC, both by record and schedule - put us behind the 8 ball when it came NCAA selection time.

But I think everything is looking positive so far - the only downside to this, and some fans are going to hate it - I think the expectation, from my point of view - with they picked up in the portal - should be NCAA bid. I don't see how that is being unfair or unrealistic given the roster they have built

 

[97spiderfan]

Really tough to project. I like all of our pick-ups in the portal and think our 2 freshman are some of the stronger high school recruits that we have gotten in a while.

That said, last year, I think most of us were all in on Jordan King (but none of us saw his A-10 POY), Hunt was viewed as very solid but some questioned his shooting ability (he was indeed very solid and shooting was better than expected) and Harris was viewed as a depth piece, probably making limited impact (he turned out to be a very important part of our bench rotation. Point being, I think all of our portal finds last year over performed board expectations.

And I think that carryovers in our expectations this year, that all of these guys are going to be homeruns in the roles that we see them in. I see Beagle and White as being plug and play guys, they should be high end starters on this year's team based upon what they have already shown in college. GW3 and Apostolos are the true wildcards. If they live up to their high school recruiting hype, we should have a team that contends for the A-10 title and an NCAA bid. Likewise if they show us why they didn't get PT at Michigan and UConn than we are probably a mid pack A-10 team.

 

[spiderman]

everyone back should improve a little.
but as for "expectations" I can't say I expect White to be an upgrade over King, or Beagle to be an upgrade over Quinn. or even Neskovic to definitely be an upgrade over Bigelow.
plus we lose Bailey and Harris.

there's a lot of new pieces. I'm excited about this group. we can be good. but we'll see.

 

[97spiderfan]

everyone back should improve a little.
but as for "expectations" I can't say I expect White to be an upgrade over King, or Beagle to be an upgrade over Quinn. or even Neskovic to definitely be an upgrade over Bigelow.
plus we lose Bailey and Harris.

there's a lot of new pieces. I'm excited about this group. we can be good. but we'll see.

Yeah, I forgot about Neskovic. He should be a plug and play starter as well. I do not expect White to be upgrade over King, that is an extremely high bar. We did lost a lot as you say, but I think we have a lot of talent coming in. Definitively a reloading versus rebuilding roster.

 

[VT4700]

Expectations are tricky to me. I can't say I expect us to make the dance this year. Can we? Sure. But, is it likely we will make the dance? I just can't go there yet. Especially when we could end up on the bubble and get left out. So, unless you are thinking maybe 9 seed or better safely inside the bubble, saying you expect a bid is not the wording I would use.

It's certainly hard to tell now with so many new guys, but I will say I could put things around a coin flip that we get in the dance. So, if I flip a coin, do I expect it to be heads? No, but it's 50/50, which I do feel we can get to for a dance chance with this team.

1. Good OOC, with a quality win or 2 that keeps our at large chances alive.
2. Top 4 A-10 finish with some quality A-10 wins mixed in.
3. If we don't win the A-10 tourney, get to the finals if we are on the bubble, or maybe even semi finals if we are on the right side of the bubble.
4. Have some luck with the stupid NET system. Get some Q1s over teams that are not juggernauts. Get Q2s over average teams that are maybe barely Q2. Have other A-10 teams have good NETs. This is why it's so hard to expect or guarantee a bid. If the A-10 only has 1 top 70 NET team like last year, it's just hard to ever make up NET ground IC, so we are relying on our IC peers to have good seasons as well.

 

[spiderstudent17]

Expectations are tricky to me. I can't say I expect us to make the dance this year. Can we? Sure. But, is it likely we will make the dance? I just can't go there yet. Especially when we could end up on the bubble and get left out. So, unless you are thinking maybe 9 seed or better safely inside the bubble, saying you expect a bid is not the wording I would use.

It's certainly hard to tell now with so many new guys, but I will say I could put things around a coin flip that we get in the dance. So, if I flip a coin, do I expect it to be heads? No, but it's 50/50, which I do feel we can get to for a dance chance with this team.

1. Good OOC, with a quality win or 2 that keeps our at large chances alive.
2. Top 4 A-10 finish with some quality A-10 wins mixed in.
3. If we don't win the A-10 tourney, get to the finals if we are on the bubble, or maybe even semi finals if we are on the right side of the bubble.
4. Have some luck with the stupid NET system. Get some Q1s over teams that are not juggernauts. Get Q2s over average teams that are maybe barely Q2. Have other A-10 teams have good NETs. This is why it's so hard to expect or guarantee a bid. If the A-10 only has 1 top 70 NET team like last year, it's just hard to ever make up NET ground IC, so we are relying on our IC peers to have good seasons as well.

I agree with your list here, but believe that OOC success and a top 4 A10 finish (which probably means 12 or more conference wins) > A10 NET rankings of all the other teams.

The A10 will be a good league this year and will have plenty of Q2 opportunities. The more Q1 opportunities, the better obviously, but I don’t think lack of Q1 opportunities in the conference would hold us back, assuming we don’t lose Q3-4 games.

Dayton only had 2, Q1 conference games last year in conference and lost both of them (at UR and at VCU). They finished with a NET of 23 and were safely in as an at-large. The key was they played an excellent OOC schedule and won Q1 games against St. John’s, Cincy, and SMU and Q2 against LSU. Also lost Q1 Houston and Northwestern. They also did not have a bad loss. Our issue over the years is we haven’t gone into conference play with an at-large resume because we either don’t have enough quality resume wins or had a couple bad resume losses. We would then need to catch up by having a spectacular in conference record and hope the A10 teams have higher rankings to boost our resume.


Dayton 2023-2024 NET rankings:
https://bracketologists.com/team/dayton-flyers

 

[VT4700]

King made 84 3s last year at 41.4%. Bigs made 48 3s at 37.2% last year. Replacing that 3 point production is the key. A big reason we struggled so much in 2023 was Tyler led us in 3 point makes with 55, but only shot 29.3% from there, Nelson made 33 at 30.8%, and Bigs made 30 at 26.5%. Roche made 52 3s at 38.5%, so I would not count him out this year. The guy can shoot it.

I will say it every off season and every in season..quality 3 point shooting is huge. Too hard to win without it. Look at the difference in Bigs' 2023 and 2024. We win more games in 23 if Bigs would have been at 37.2% and less games, probably a large amount less, if Bigs would have been at 26.5% last year.

We have a lot of 3 point potential on this team, especially with the new guys. And, Hunt made 22 3s at 38.6% last year, so if he can double his attempts and makes and give us higher volume at even 35+%, that would be huge.

 

[VT4700]

I agree with your list here, but believe that OOC success and a top 4 A10 finish (which probably means 12 or more conference wins) > A10 NET rankings of all the other teams.

The A10 will be a good league this year and will have plenty of Q2 opportunities. The more Q1 opportunities, the better obviously, but I don’t think lack of Q1 opportunities in the conference would hold us back, assuming we don’t lose Q3-4 games.

Dayton only had 2, Q1 conference games last year in conference and lost both of them (at UR and at VCU). They finished with a NET of 23 and were safely in as an at-large. The key was they played an excellent OOC schedule and won Q1 games against St. John’s, Cincy, and SMU and Q2 against LSU. Also lost Q1 Houston and Northwestern. They also did not have a bad loss. Our issue over the years is we haven’t gone into conference play with an at-large resume because we either don’t have enough quality resume wins or had a couple bad resume losses. We would then need to catch up by having a spectacular in conference record and hope the A10 teams have higher rankings to boost our resume.


Dayton 2023-2024 NET rankings:
https://bracketologists.com/team/dayton-flyers

Good post. We have not been as good as we have needed to OOC most years. Looking at Dayton, they did beat some good teams, but I also think they got lucky with the NET. None of the teams they beat OOC made the dance. LSU was 17-16, Cincinnati finished 11th in the Big 12, and SMU 5th in the AAC. St John's was probably their best win, but they only finished 5th in the BE. But, they beat these teams, so you have to give them credit, even if the NET rewarded them way too much for this.

I think most years our OOC schedules are fine. We just need to beat more of the teams we play.

 

[spiderstudent17]

Good post. We have not been as good as we have needed to OOC most years. Looking at Dayton, they did beat some good teams, but I also think they got lucky with the NET. None of the teams they beat OOC made the dance. LSU was 17-16, Cincinnati finished 11th in the Big 12, and SMU 5th in the AAC. St John's was probably their best win, but they only finished 5th in the BE. But, they beat these teams, so you have to give them credit, even if the NET rewarded them way too much for this.

I think most years our OOC schedules are fine. We just need to beat more of the teams we play.

Good point as well with Dayton’s Q1 wins not making the tournament but still being regarded as top wins. The unfortunate reality is that the NET is an imperfect system and skewed by power conferences so a team like Cincinnati is considered a Q1 win even though they went 20-14 in regular season and 7-11 in conference. I don’t know how we work around that and that’s a more widespread issue. To your last point, completely agree also. While we don’t play in flashy tournaments like Battle 4 Atlantis and Maui invitational, we typically play 1-2 big name teams a year and other solid mid major or lower P6 conference teams. That is certainly good enough, but we have to win the games. Had we beaten Boston College, Wichita State, and Northern Iowa last year finishing 10-2 OCC with losses to Colorado and Florida and thus finishing the regular season at 25-6, I think we would’ve had a decent shot as an at-large or been first four out. So the opportunities are there. Just need to capitalize on them.

 

[GKiller]

But I think everything is looking positive so far - the only downside to this, and some fans are going to hate it - I think the expectation, from my point of view - with they picked up in the portal - should be NCAA bid. I don't see how that is being unfair or unrealistic given the roster they have built

Very fair expectation. I've said this b4...if not now when. do we have to wait until year 22 of the Mooney era to get a 4th appearance? With our school it's probably beyond that, maybe 25 years. But right now factually we've give out 22 years of contract for 3 ncaa appearances. 19 r in the past, it would be batshit crazy to not expect 1 in next 3 but again it's UR we have different performance metrics. Every year with so much D1 turnover u can't really wait to future.

But biggest thing is urgency. The lack of it. There is never that urgency that u feel from Mooney, the school, media, or a lot of our fanbase for the NCAAs. Every once in a while u do get it from the players. But in general it's keep the status quo over urgency. Just down Broad St. its a different mentality. I would love to feel urgency for making the NCAA, it's very very rare to have that feeling here, and imo that's a problem but I don't see changing.

 

[spiderman]

Very fair expectation. I've said this b4...if not now when. do we have to wait until year 22 of the Mooney era to get a 4th appearance? With our school it's probably beyond that, maybe 25 years. But right now factually we've give out 22 years of contract for 3 ncaa appearances. 19 r in the past, it would be batshit crazy to not expect 1 in next 3 but again it's UR we have different performance metrics. Every year with so much D1 turnover u can't really wait to future.

But biggest thing is urgency. The lack of it. There is never that urgency that u feel from Mooney, the school, media, or a lot of our fanbase for the NCAAs. Every once in a while u do get it from the players. But in general it's keep the status quo over urgency. Just down Broad St. its a different mentality. I would love to feel urgency for making the NCAA, it's very very rare to have that feeling here, and imo that's a problem but I don't see changing.

so your "expectation" that we dance is based on how often we haven't danced, and on our collective desire to dance? nothing to do with who we added, who we lost, and how the other teams in the conference look?

 

[spiderstudent17]

The precedence was set last year that we can do very well, with a relatively new roster every year. 4 out of our 5 year starters last year were transfers who were playing their 1st or 2nd year at Richmond. With new summer practices allowed by the NCAA, there is more opportunities for guys to gel and learn our system sooner. Like I’ve said before, I truly believe the new NIL & Transfer era has benefitted us greatly. Our best years boils down to teams that can do/have the following: a dynamic PG who can create his own shot and score 30 points on a given night, a big man who can facilitate the offense, and a few wings/forwards who can shoot the 3 ball relatively efficiently. Years in the past, we’ve relied on high school recruits and hoped they pan out. Now with transfer portal and NIL, we have a lot more data to find players who will fit and excel in our system who have also adjusted to the college game and grown stronger physically. We can identify a player who fits our system, pay them a very competitive NIL to come here, and they can play immediately and no longer need to sit out a year.

 

[VT4700]

so your "expectation" that we dance is based on how often we haven't danced, and on our collective desire to dance? nothing to do with who we added, who we lost, and how the other teams in the conference look?

One thing we can "expect" from him with nearly every post is pro VCU, anti Richmond. How would he know about anyone's urgency? Such a ridiculous take, as if Mooney doesn't have urgency to make the dance every year. And, only sometimes do our players have it? Seriously? So, just because TJ and ShawnDre never danced, it was because they never had the urgency to do so? Unbelievable.

 

[8legs1dream]

OK, I want to play this game too. What was the reason those guys never danced?

And that urgency that GK is referencing and that you dismiss is the sole reason for our most recent trip to the NCAA's. Without it you would be sitting here 13 years since our last trip making the same arguments and saying the exact same things and propping up you-know-who.

 

[spider23]

TJ and Shawndre never danced mostly because those were the teams (which i pointed out in preseason) had major holes, and no depth. That is on the coach.

 

[VT4700]

TJ and Shawndre never danced mostly because those were the teams (which i pointed out in preseason) had major holes, and no depth. That is on the coach.

Fair to say, and recruiting is a big part of coaching success, but we had talent around them.....maybe not enough depth, and holes like you said, but we were 1st 4 out 1 year and probably only needed a win over VCU in the semis (OT loss) to get in another year. Bottom line is we didn't get in, but we had a couple solid 12-6 A-10 and 13-5 A-10 seasons 2 out of TJ's 3 year here.

 

[spiderman]

OK, I want to play this game too. What was the reason those guys never danced?

And that urgency that GK is referencing and that you dismiss is the sole reason for our most recent trip to the NCAA's. Without it you would be sitting here 13 years since our last trip making the same arguments and saying the exact same things and propping up you-know-who.

the sole reason we danced in 2022 was urgency???

 

[VT4700]

the sole reason we danced in 2022 was urgency???

LOL!!!!!

 

[spiderstudent17]

But biggest thing is urgency. The lack of it. There is never that urgency that u feel from Mooney, the school, media, or a lot of our fanbase for the NCAAs. Every once in a while u do get it from the players. But in general it's keep the status quo over urgency. Just down Broad St. its a different mentality. I would love to feel urgency for making the NCAA, it's very very rare to have that feeling here, and imo that's a problem but I don't see changing.

I think I get what you're saying here. Richmond is not outwardly vocal when it comes to setting expectations and goals. Lots of teams have coach's and athletic director's who engage on social media and aren't afraid to set explicitly state goals of NCAAs and winning A10 championships rather than the ambiguous "compete" that we love to say. So this can come across as a lack of urgency to some. While perhaps small in the grand scheme of things, I am sure many fans would appreciate us being more vocal and explicit with our goals. Also, this is one of the few times where I think having a larger alumni base can help with urgency as the larger the fanbase, the more likelihood of people donating and caring about results, the more media coverage there is, which leads to applying pressure on the athletic department.

With that said, I certainly think our actions have showed an urgency of making the NCAAs in other - very important ways - as we consistently spend at a top 4 or 5 in the A10 on basketball resources, coach's salaries, and NILs in the A10. We have also the nicest facilities (arena + practice facility) in the entire A10 in my opinion. So I think there is plenty of evidence to show we care enough that NCAAs are urgent for us. Hiring/firing a coach, while the most pronounced way of showing that, isn't always the best way. SJU AD fired Martelli in 2019 after he won the A10 tournament in 2014 and 2016. He had gone to NCAAs 5 times before that too with an elite 8 appearance. We can respect SJU for showing urgency of wanting to make the NCAAs again, but many could argue that in hindsight, firing Martelli wasn't the best decision at the time.

The administration likely saw that in 2015 we had: 20+ win season, 4 seed in the A10 tournament, the 1st four out of NCAA tournament, an NIT quarter final appearance and in 2017 we had: 20+ win season, 3 seed in A10 tournament, NIT quarter final appearance and thought that Mooney showed enough promise. Rather than firing him, they felt perhaps the best approach was to remove other obstacles (self-imposed academic restrictions, getting a practice facility) that allowed him to recruit more easily. We could've fired him in 2016-2018, but there runs the risk that a new coach would do even worse and we're back to square one. Also, I think the University overall has an institutional culture where they tend to be more risk averse, so if there were other avenues to explore to improve our basketball results instead of firing our coach, they would want to do that first. Certainly other factors like Mooney being a very nice guy who represents the program well and buying out the contract likely factored into the decision as well.

I knew TJ and some of the other guys on the basketball team in college at that time. I can assure you they cared very much and were urgent in wanting to make the NCAA. They were more disappointed in losses than we were.

 

[GKiller]

so your "expectation" that we dance is based on how often we haven't danced, and on our collective desire to dance? nothing to do with who we added, who we lost, and how the other teams in the conference look?

of course all that & u have to have a capable team. and I do think we have that team. I thought that went without saying here but I guess could have explicitly stated. if we had a bad team I wouldn't have the expectation. having a bad team with no chance is so much worse but the point is u have to knock down the door more often.

so yeah how often we haven't danced does play a role. It should create even more urgency. That's quite normal in sports. but from following UR a very long time its not our MO. if u don't have any expectations for ncaa bids a UR that's perfectly fine, u r no different than many others or the school & admin. I feel a different way.

 

[97spiderfan]

the sole reason we danced in 2022 was urgency???

The reason we danced that year was Gilly balling out in the A-10 tourney. Prior to that, that team played the regular season with a remarkable lack of urgency. All of these 5 year seniors coming back to prove something, preseason number 1 team in the A-10, and then we finish 10-8, 6th in the conference. All was forgotten thanks to the run in DC and win over Iowa in the NCAA though.

 

[GKiller]

One thing we can "expect" from him with nearly every post is pro VCU, anti Richmond. How would he know about anyone's urgency? Such a ridiculous take, as if Mooney doesn't have urgency to make the dance every year. And, only sometimes do our players have it? Seriously? So, just because TJ and ShawnDre never danced, it was because they never had the urgency to do so? Unbelievable.

Ah here we go with the VCU fan stuff again. From you of all people with your history?

U r right I can't look into anyone's souls and distinguish urgency. I'm not in locker room. neither r u. I said there is a lack of feeling of urgency. and I think there is. I can go only go by what I witness and hear. Its not a outrageuous take for those who have been a long term fan of mens hoops. student17 hit on some of that, we're not outwardly vocal. I did say the players r the exception sometimes. Of course the players have a desire to make the NCAA, but the culture & mentality play a big part in helping them achieve that imo. If we truly expect to make it more often I think we will. Until then I think more of the same.

I think last year we needed more urgency and instead we got premature victory laps. Think it hurt us. I can't prove that but human nature seeps into sports regularly.

 

[GKiller]

I think I get what you're saying here. Richmond is not outwardly vocal when it comes to setting expectations and goals. Lots of teams have coach's and athletic director's who engage on social media and aren't afraid to set explicitly state goals of NCAAs and winning A10 championships rather than the ambiguous "compete" that we love to say. So this can come across as a lack of urgency to some. While perhaps small in the grand scheme of things, I am sure many fans would appreciate us being more vocal and explicit with our goals. Also, this is one of the few times where I think having a larger alumni base can help with urgency as the larger the fanbase, the more likelihood of people donating and caring about results, the more media coverage there is, which leads to applying pressure on the athletic department.

With that said, I certainly think our actions have showed an urgency of making the NCAAs in other - very important ways - as we consistently spend at a top 4 or 5 in the A10 on basketball resources, coach's salaries, and NILs in the A10. We have also the nicest facilities (arena + practice facility) in the entire A10 in my opinion. So I think there is plenty of evidence to show we care enough that NCAAs are urgent for us. Hiring/firing a coach, while the most pronounced way of showing that, isn't always the best way. SJU AD fired Martelli in 2019 after he won the A10 tournament in 2014 and 2016. He had gone to NCAAs 5 times before that too with an elite 8 appearance. We can respect SJU for showing urgency of wanting to make the NCAAs again, but many could argue that in hindsight, firing Martelli wasn't the best decision at the time.

The administration likely saw that in 2015 we had: 20+ win season, 4 seed in the A10 tournament, the 1st four out of NCAA tournament, an NIT quarter final appearance and in 2017 we had: 20+ win season, 3 seed in A10 tournament, NIT quarter final appearance and thought that Mooney showed enough promise. Rather than firing him, they felt perhaps the best approach was to remove other obstacles (self-imposed academic restrictions, getting a practice facility) that allowed him to recruit more easily. We could've fired him in 2016-2018, but there runs the risk that a new coach would do even worse and we're back to square one. Also, I think the University overall has an institutional culture where they tend to be more risk averse, so if there were other avenues to explore to improve our basketball results instead of firing our coach, they would want to do that first. Certainly other factors like Mooney being a very nice guy who represents the program well and buying out the contract likely factored into the decision as well.

I knew TJ and some of the other guys on the basketball team in college at that time. I can assure you they cared very much and were urgent in wanting to make the NCAA. They were more disappointed in losses than we were.

I back our players all the time. It was not a shot at them to be clear. I just meant the players are only ones occasionally vocal about it. I agree with u on 1st paragraph. It's really an urgency that has to be set from the top down. I thought we established that when going to A10 and then we backed away to be the nice guy program.

Also who care about St Joes. I don't. Maybe they screwed up the hire. Tons of examples of the other way when u make a change and it helps. If we were in market for a new coach of course no guarantee but I'd feel confident because of our attractiveness and fact 3 of the 4 prior coaches at UR did even better than Mooney.

 

[spider23]

I do think the coaching staff can lead and set the culture and urgency. Yes, human nature plays a role - look at NHL and NBA finals - both teams go up 3-0 and then take a big breath and get blown out of the arena in game 4.

BUT - there has been lack of urgency in the messaging externally. So if you are telling the guys in practice we need to win these early games, and then in the presser you are saying well its early, we are young, its hard to win on the road - that has to seep into the team's thought process.

Flip that to our old frenemy Hurley in New England, he says: People better get us now! - after losing early.

 

[SpiderTrap]

Fair to say, and recruiting is a big part of coaching success, but we had talent around them.....maybe not enough depth, and holes like you said, but we were 1st 4 out 1 year and probably only needed a win over VCU in the semis (OT loss) to get in another year. Bottom line is we didn't get in, but we had a couple solid 12-6 A-10 and 13-5 A-10 seasons 2 out of TJ's 3 year here.

VT - you bring up a good point, and a point that I am not picking on you specifically - but I think the general fans and especially administration how they view it. Especially given your name is VT.

You mention we had solid teams, were first 4 out one year and had good records. All true. You are correct. But I think that is celebrated and awarded by some for UR Hoops, whereas some will see it as - you didn't make the dance in any of those years. A good comparison would be Seth Greenberg at VA Tech. He had good teams and solid records. Many times landing on the bubble and just missing. But that is what ultimately got him fired. But at UR - that is "almost" or "solid" season is celebrated or seen as good enough.

 

[spider23]

Also who care about St Joes. I don't. Maybe they screwed up the hire. Tons of examples of the other way when u make a change and it helps. If we were in market for a new coach of course no guarantee but I'd feel confident because of our attractiveness and fact 3 of the 4 prior coaches at UR did even better than Mooney.

I was a huge Mooney fan early on, when he was getting interest following the 2012 NCAA - I was fine with him leaving. Because we are/were an attractive spot, and we could have attracted an up and comer with plenty of motivation. I did think at that time that was our model, get a guy that has had success at lower levels (JB) and let him rip for 3-5 years. I don't get the attraction to having a coach for 20+ years. I get it with Coach K and Duke and Izzo at MSU because they have won big.

 

[VT4700]

VT - you bring up a good point, and a point that I am not picking on you specifically - but I think the general fans and especially administration how they view it. Especially given your name is VT.

You mention we had solid teams, were first 4 out one year and had good records. All true. You are correct. But I think that is celebrated and awarded by some for UR Hoops, whereas some will see it as - you didn't make the dance in any of those years. A good comparison would be Seth Greenberg at VA Tech. He had good teams and solid records. Many times landing on the bubble and just missing. But that is what ultimately got him fired. But at UR - that is "almost" or "solid" season is celebrated or seen as good enough.

I didn't celebrate anything. But, I do think you can have a good, solid season without making the dance. I will call last year solid as well. Others feel differently and that's fine too.

 

[GKiller]

I was a huge Mooney fan early on, when he was getting interest following the 2012 NCAA - I was fine with him leaving. Because we are/were an attractive spot, and we could have attracted an up and comer with plenty of motivation. I did think at that time that was our model, get a guy that has had success at lower levels (JB) and let him rip for 3-5 years. I don't get the attraction to having a coach for 20+ years. I get it with Coach K and Duke and Izzo at MSU because they have won big.

Yep and I’ve asked this b4 and maybe some can answer. Should your expectations and standards of success increase with a 20 year coach?

I think so but ours I think have remarkably gone down. Even if u go by our own Bob black saying every kid that comes as freshman should go at least once by senior, 1 for 4, we r missing that by a decent margin.

This isn't me bagging on Mooney either I’ve never ever called him a bad coach he’s not. It’s an institutional thing.

 

[spiderstudent17]

I back our players all the time. It was not a shot at them to be clear. I just meant the players are only ones occasionally vocal about it. I agree with u on 1st paragraph. It's really an urgency that has to be set from the top down. I thought we established that when going to A10 and then we backed away to be the nice guy program.

Also who care about St Joes. I don't. Maybe they screwed up the hire. Tons of examples of the other way when u make a change and it helps. If we were in market for a new coach of course no guarantee but I'd feel confident because of our attractiveness and fact 3 of the 4 prior coaches at UR did even better than Mooney.

You're absolutely right that we are a very attractive option for a coach for a variety of reasons. Yes, hiring a new coach means we can exceed what we had done with the prior coach and it can also mean that the results will be worse. I brought up SJU as an example to illustrate that sometimes the wrong hire can set you back. For the record, my own philosophy if I were AD would be someone like SJU's AD and be vocal about my expectations and always striving and taking measures to reach those goals, even if it meant hiring 5 different coaches until we found the right one. I would love for us to have the academic mentality of Harvard and the athletic mentality of Ohio State even if it is virtually impossible to achieve. The mindset is important. However, my perspective isn't the only right way to go about it and I can understand that, for a variety of different reasons, the administration wanted to pursue other avenues first to address our lack of meaningful basketball results that was more then firing our coach.

Looking at the stretch from the 2012-2019, the results were not horrendous. We were finishing top 4 in the A10 several years with above average win rate. Were the results spectacular either? No. But like I said before, it showed enough promise that the administration likely felt that Mooney can get over the hump if we were to remove other self-imposed obstacles that may have held him back some. Since then, what have we done? 2019, we had a 24-7 season, 2nd seed NCAA, and very good chance of at-large. In 2020, we made the A10 tournament + R32 NCAA. In 2024, we won the regular season championship for the first time. And going into the 2025 season, we have some of the highest rank recruits we have ever gotten. All this with us consistently spending at the top of the A10 in terms of basketball resources, NIL, and facilities.

So could it also be fair to say that the administration also made a good decision and showed urgency in addressing our lack of championship/NCAA results in a different manner, which led to improved results or is firing a coach the only way a school can show urgency for wanting to make the NCAAs?

 

[Eight Legger]

Yep and I’ve asked this b4 and maybe some can answer. Should your expectations and standards of success increase with a 20 year coach?

I think so but ours I think have remarkably gone down. Even if u go by our own Bob black saying every kid that comes as freshman should go at least once by senior, 1 for 4, we r missing that by a decent margin.

This isn't me bagging on Mooney either I’ve never ever called him a bad coach he’s not. It’s an institutional thing.

Mooney is the ninth-longest tenured coach in D1 at this point. Here are the ones ahead of him: Tom Izzo (Michigan State), Greg Kampe (Oakland), James Jones (Yale), Mark Few (Gonzaga), Randy Bennett (Saint Mary's), Leonard Hamilton (Florida State), Bill Self (Kansas), and Scott Drew (Baylor).

All but Kampe and Jones have had major success, won a lot of conference championships, made a ton of NCAA tournaments and won a lot of games there. Three have won national championships. Jones has won eight combined regular and postseason tournaments (and the Ivy hasn't had the latter for most of his tenure), while Kampe has won nine. Mooney has won three. It's fair to say that Mooney is an anomaly among D1 coaches to have this type of long tenure at a high-level school without having major success within his own conference and/or in the NCAAs, and I say that not in an accusatory way but just simply from a place of fact.

 

[GKiller]

You're absolutely right that we are a very attractive option for a coach for a variety of reasons. Yes, hiring a new coach means we can exceed what we had done with the prior coach and it can also mean that the results will be worse. I brought up SJU as an example to illustrate that sometimes the wrong hire can set you back. For the record, my own philosophy if I were AD would be someone like SJU's AD and be vocal about my expectations and always striving and taking measures to reach those goals, even if it meant hiring 5 different coaches until we found the right one. I would love for us to have the academic mentality of Harvard and the athletic mentality of Ohio State even if it is virtually impossible to achieve. The mindset is important. However, my perspective isn't the only right way to go about it and I can understand that, for a variety of different reasons, the administration wanted to pursue other avenues first to address our lack of meaningful basketball results that was more then firing our coach.

Looking at the stretch from the 2012-2019, the results were not horrendous. We were finishing top 4 in the A10 several years with above average win rate. Were the results spectacular either? No. But like I said before, it showed enough promise that the administration likely felt that Mooney can get over the hump if we were to remove other self-imposed obstacles that may have held him back some. Since then, what have we done? 2019, we had a 24-7 season, 2nd seed NCAA, and very good chance of at-large. In 2020, we made the A10 tournament + R32 NCAA. In 2024, we won the regular season championship for the first time. And going into the 2025 season, we have some of the highest rank recruits we have ever gotten. All this with us consistently spending at the top of the A10 in terms of basketball resources, NIL, and facilities.

So could it also be fair to say that the administration also made a good decision and showed urgency in addressing our lack of championship/NCAA results in a different manner, which led to improved results or is firing a coach the only way a school can show urgency for wanting to make the NCAAs?

wrong hire can set u back, but less likely at UR - 75% of prevous 4 coaches did better

Mooney results r better recently but Covid gave him extra year with same vet group, there is some duplication there imo. without Covid there is no 2022.

firing & hiring is #1 way to show urgency by far

I don't agree w many self imposed obstacles - academic is really only and there r examples of that. I hoep its chnaged. However we've otherwise had more resources than most of our peer schools. VCU has pull out bleachers their gym is garbage.

UR gave Mooney an extension before the more recent results, yet after he was still on 10 year deal. I think results as long as mediocre and u r not an AHole is what matters. Now he gets another with 3 years already left, its insane but I called it.

let me ask u - should a 20 year coach at 1 place have increased expecations and standards?

 

[8legs1dream]

LOL!!!!!

laugh it up. What was more likely that year that a group of 4th, 5th and 6th year seniors said enough is F'n enough and we are not going to go down as another class of all time greats that never made it to the biggest stage and scratched and clawed their way in or your guy finally figured out what buttons to press in the postseason to get the most out of a team that was an abject failure to that point?

 

[spiderman]

laugh it up. What was more likely that year that a group of 4th, 5th and 6th year seniors said enough is F'n enough and we are not going to go down as another class of all time greats that never made it to the biggest stage and scratched and clawed their way in or your guy finally figured out what buttons to press in the postseason to get the most out of a team that was an abject failure to that point?

come on. that "urgent" team lost 13 games.
Gilyard had an amazing run. he ALWAYS played hard. but he was dominant for that week.

I've got to go look for this urgency stat in kenpom. guessing it only shows up in wins.

 

[brooklyn brownstone]

I understand the urgency. It’s in the messaging.

In the age of the portal, I don’t think you accept and set expectations low and say things like we are a leafy campus. You go and recruit players just as good or better than those that are now gone. We did that last year, I want it again this year and for improvement to build and winning to sustain itself.

Saying we were first out but what kept us out was a crucial loss to VCU is the exact institutional issue many complain about. Good season…almost great, oh well, next year. That’s not good enough. I want that win, I want that NCAA and I want that to be the norm.

I agree that Moon is a good coach. He has all the structure in place to succeed. I don’t see any excuses even when leafiness is thrown around. We lost good players. So did everyone else (look what UD lost.)

If not now, when? It’s a valid question.