I would feel equally disappointed with us finishing 10th or 14th - neither is acceptable for UR basketball, and I suspect the players feel the same way. Pretty sure the admin does not though.
A10 Preseason Rankings
- Thread starter ManiBenton
- Start date
All I know if that I was the one pumping in millions of dollars into our MBB program and this was my return, I would be pretty damn pissed off. But Queally seems fine with it in fact he told all the fans to lower our expectations, so apparently he has already lowered his and is OK with it.
high projections don't excite me and low ones don't bother me. I care about what happens on the floor.
I think we can be better defensively this season, but like last year I worry that we don't have enough scoring. someone (or two) is going to have to step up and be better than expected.
I think we can be better defensively this season, but like last year I worry that we don't have enough scoring. someone (or two) is going to have to step up and be better than expected.
Only way I would say we "overachieve" in my book would be if we finish top 6 next season in A10 and win 19-20 games overall. That won't get us post-season bids, but it would be an overachievement in my mind worth noting and giving credit to the players and coaches if that were to occur.
But of course - if that were to happen, I would then expect it to keep happening along with improvement and would see post-season bid the next year.
But of course - if that were to happen, I would then expect it to keep happening along with improvement and would see post-season bid the next year.
Anything outside of a top 4 finish is a lost season. Each year that we don't accomplish that I lose a little more interest. I'm kinda running on empty. It's getting way too easy to not just care.
If we finish this far down in conference, that will be two lost seasons after extending CM. I was willing to give him a (5th?) chance to convince me he has it figured out but if we land at 13-15th again that really should end the debate. Again.
And if that bottom half plays out, let’s see the spin by Mooney’s fans on this site. Let me guess - there will be reference to our last NCAA appearance. Also count on Hardt to send out some of his usual fluff.
At this stage of our program and everything pumped in including an overpaid coach, we should never be having discussions about bottom half of conference. And we should certainly not ever place there.
You guys! The 14-year employment clock resets to zero every time there is an NCAA bid. Come on now.
Let's revisit this discussion sometime in 2036.
Let's revisit this discussion sometime in 2036.
And that matters why? Like football, we’ll end up with two levels of D-1 . Those that make money and those that
don’t.
There is some truth to that, I think realistically the clock resets to 5 every time we make the tourney. Meaning - we make the tourney - he has got 5 years to get back to the tourney OR get close enough (NIT or bubble) to keep it going. So you are correct - I think this needs to be revisited 2027
Probably fairly true. It feels like the minimum bar would be once every four years just so every guy has a chance to be in the dance at least one time during their tenure.
But I realize this is crazy talk.
It matters to disprove the argument Barkley was trying to make, that every good player is going to a top-25 team. Sure, I agree that the general landscape is changing in a way that is not good for us, but the narrative that there will be no talented players for anyone else is just not accurate.
for the most part, mid majors have always fought over the players that the high majors don't have room for. so what's changing?
actually, some mid majors may have a better chance at landing a high major player under the new rules if they're willing to outbid for someone.
actually, some mid majors may have a better chance at landing a high major player under the new rules if they're willing to outbid for someone.
I think mid-majors with a STRONG NIL program probably won't steal the top 50 recruits, as they will always be taken up by P5 programs - but it gives programs, like UR - the chance to get a top 100 kid - maybe local, maybe some connection to UR or Virginia area - and is looking at either being the 3rd recruit at a major program or being a top recruit at a P5 program that is currently losing - so the mid-major can step in, make him a priority, pay him A STRONG A#@! offer and land that kid - who could be a stud in the A10 and still move up in a year or two by transfer portal or stay in the program and make the NBA from the A10.
Going to admit, never been a big Pitino guy, but from a basketball perspective he has always been cutting edge and ahead of his time. I remember when 3 point line was introduced in Virginia h.s. basketball. Our coach showed us Rick Pitino videos for drills for 3 pointers.
Now, along with other big schools they have hired a "GM" to manage the NIL collectives and interactions/payouts to players and agents. He can use this to a certain degree to insulate himself and coach the players how he wants to without considering NIL. As Trap noted, players (and media) are going to talk about amounts, but Rick can deny (he is good at that
) that he was involved in the amounts.
nypost.com
Now, along with other big schools they have hired a "GM" to manage the NIL collectives and interactions/payouts to players and agents. He can use this to a certain degree to insulate himself and coach the players how he wants to without considering NIL. As Trap noted, players (and media) are going to talk about amounts, but Rick can deny (he is good at that
) that he was involved in the amounts.
Ex-assistant coach Matt Abdelmassih makes St. John’s return to head NIL push
The new era of St. John’s basketball also now includes a familiar face from the past.
nypost.com
8legs1dream
Graduate Assistant
somebody better tell every mid-major that made a final four or elite eight run in the past ten years that it isn't possible.
Not true, now any school can win the NCAA Tournament.
Any school that is willing to pay its Top 8 players the same as the Top 8 contracts in the NBA...
We’re in early years of Moon cycle 4. I’ve posted the cyclic results many times in the past so don’t feel like digging them up again but they’re exactly what you think they are, each cycles coming out around 55%. Only the upperclassmen led teams in each cycle threatened to make the ncaas. Whether the portal now expedites the cycle and gets us old quicker remains to be seen. Or do we have to wait for the current freshmen class to get to jr/sr year as was previous cycle.
The problem with the old way - waiting for the frosh class to get to Jr/SR year is that with the portal - they might leave before then. I thought Nelson would be one of those guys - when he was a JR, we would be seeing big returns - but he is gone after 1 year. SO it might be more difficult for that formula to work, but I think if you can get guys to stay 3-4 years together - you have an advantage over the teams loaded with 1-2 year transfers.
This is the only way that a Mooney led team is going to be successful. The question is whether the right team chemistry can be found. Hopefully this year’s incoming freshman have it.
If that is the case then we are waiting on the following players to pan out and turn JR/SR.
G - Trevor Smith
G - Collin Tanner
G - Mikkel Tyne
G - Jack Graham
F - Ryan Soulis
C - Mike Walz
F - Aiden Noyes
But the question will always be - how many of these guys will still be on the team when they are JR/SR.
G - Trevor Smith
G - Collin Tanner
G - Mikkel Tyne
G - Jack Graham
F - Ryan Soulis
C - Mike Walz
F - Aiden Noyes
But the question will always be - how many of these guys will still be on the team when they are JR/SR.
We will add transfers just like we have done the past 2 seasons. I think most teams will add and lose multiple transfers most years.
Yes - we will add transfers, and I know its early in the Mooney years of using extensive transfers - but we have not had success yet with the portal and loading up on transfers.
Last year - I was very optimistic in what we had returning, potential NBA Player and A10 POY in Burton, very good glue guy and defensive player in Goose, and potential role player ready to take next step to started and solid contributor in Grace. We then added, what I thought were very good pieces in the portal - Roche, Quinn, and Bigelow - all seemed to be very good fits for our system and compliment what we needed. And we thought we added a good young guy in Nelson. And what happened? We finished 15-18.
So I count last year as year 1 for Mooney with the portal and safe to say - it was not a success.
We are entering year 2 - and by all accounts, not feeling much better about it.
The old way with Mooney - get guys to stay together for 3-4 years. That might not be possible anymore with the portal, so can we succeed in the new world of the portal or are we still hoping for those 7 guys to not only stick around, but become really good players.
Last year - I was very optimistic in what we had returning, potential NBA Player and A10 POY in Burton, very good glue guy and defensive player in Goose, and potential role player ready to take next step to started and solid contributor in Grace. We then added, what I thought were very good pieces in the portal - Roche, Quinn, and Bigelow - all seemed to be very good fits for our system and compliment what we needed. And we thought we added a good young guy in Nelson. And what happened? We finished 15-18.
So I count last year as year 1 for Mooney with the portal and safe to say - it was not a success.
We are entering year 2 - and by all accounts, not feeling much better about it.
The old way with Mooney - get guys to stay together for 3-4 years. That might not be possible anymore with the portal, so can we succeed in the new world of the portal or are we still hoping for those 7 guys to not only stick around, but become really good players.
I still think the old way is the best way ... only filling in with transfers as needed. I just don't think we'll out-recruit / out-bid for top talent in the NIL transfer world.
we may have just landed one of our top classes. our best runs were with talented players who played early and developed. bringing in short term transfers that bury this class on the bench could lead to transfers.
two things have to happen. we need to follow this class up with another strong one with at least 2 "hits". and if this current class is the goods and if they earn the time, we need to get them in games.
we may have just landed one of our top classes. our best runs were with talented players who played early and developed. bringing in short term transfers that bury this class on the bench could lead to transfers.
two things have to happen. we need to follow this class up with another strong one with at least 2 "hits". and if this current class is the goods and if they earn the time, we need to get them in games.
What happened was Nelson got worse instead of better as the season went on, and we had nowhere to turn. I think Roche, Bigs, and Quinn were and are great additions, but, looking back, Mooney made a mistake giving Nelson the keys and not landing a PG in the portal.
all 3 were good solid experienced additions ... and we went 15-18. they're all back.
this year we add King and Harris for only one year, plus Hunt for 2.
we might start 5 transfers.
and we're projected 14th in a 15 team conference.
Projected means nothing....when u see a predictions article out there, it is usually one guy's opinion. Anyway, where do you see us finishing? I agree recruiting is huge, and we need to keep at it, but that doesn't mean Roche, Bigs, and Quinn were not great additions, and same with our guys this year.
I'm always optimistic, often wrong.
Roche, Bigs and Quinn were good additions. good lower level conference players who filled needs. but we still lost 18 games.
I like this year's additions too. and I like the freshmen class a lot.
agreed predictions mean nothing but that's all we have until we get on the floor. and they're from pretty unbiased sources who track the other teams in our conference more closely than I do.
I am always optimistic also, and, yes, wrong at times. As always, I am wanting a top 4 finish this year. I think there is a chance for a real good year here. I think we have the PG we need, and I think our defense will be good. It will probably come down to 3 point shooting. You just have to have multiple guys making a good amount of high volume 3s to be successful.
This guy is picking us at #90 and third in the A-10 with Bigs at SF and Harris at PF and Walz, Smith, Tanner, and Tyne nowhere to be found in the rotation. 🧐
Not a bad projection from who I can only assume must be Chris Mooney.
I wouldn’t call it the best way, but otherwise agree. It is the most likely way for UR with its current men’s basketball approach and coach to have a NCAA bound team.
I haven't considered it because there's no way it should happen if we are serious about winning a championship. Seems like a great kid but he averaged 5 points a game at Western Carolina as a senior. He is what he is.
Yeah, if Harris starts over Noyes/Roche that is not a good sign. Also no way, Mooney wrote this, an article likes this might put some type of expectation on us to have a good season and Mooney hates any type of expectations being put on him.
Possibly, I just don't know where a starting line up of King, Hunt, Harris, Big and Quinn where your shooting come froms. King is the only guy with a pedigree as a shooter in that line-up, which means defenses are going to key on him and let a guy like Harris try and beat them.
Shooting is a major concern this year. It could be the make or break for this team. Even if we are improved defensively, and we are more athletic and maybe better at rebounding - we still need to put the ball in the basket - and Mooney offense is built on shooting. Maybe just means a lot of low scoring games - which if we can keep close - gives us a chance at more wins, maybe.
Similar threads
