"it likely means nothing more than a record just above .500." We definitely have the right coach for this scenario.
Fire Mooney
- Thread starter Gospiders06
- Start date
- Status
Just because Mooney won't get fired doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about it. It should happen, hell it should've happened 5 years ago. People need to realize the truth about the program with Mooney and how there is no bright future with him. Hopefully we can wake up the fan base and get more on board with this change.
The fan base is and has been awake. Not one single fan would shed a tear if Mooney were let go tomorrow. Problem is the administration, Hardt and company, are as risk averse as Mooney in his coaching. They fear, players leaving, they fear us having a down year or two when a new coach takes over due to the transition, they fear the unknown.
So, they stay in their comfort zone of what is known. I just honestly don't know how one sets out becomes an athletic director, and then gets that job, and is like yeah, I'm OK with being average in our flagship sport. That would seem to be an awfully miserable experience. If I was AD, I would want to go out and hire my guy, who I believed in to take us to a level that we have never been at before. I would have faith in my abilities to do that, if I were an AD.
Instead, we have John Hardt, playing out the end of his career in a cushy high dollar job, that as long as he keeps the trains running on time, has no pressure or nor grander ambition for UR athletics. It is really sad. Chuck Boone would be pissed as hell, if he saw the state of operations at UR now.
This has been my fear for some time. Let's say we got knocked out in the a10 tourney, I have no confidence in a Hardt hire. I would rather roll the dice, but I'm afraid a Hardt hire wouldn't be any better.
You crushed it on the current situation 97. I am not a UR grad and even I know that the real Achilles heel has been the AD spot. The Moon man really lucked out regarding his bosses. One gives him a crazy long term deal and the next two are basically figureheads.
I had modest expectations going into this season but I gotta say, I’m disappointed. It certainly feels like we have a decent set of players that for whatever reason are less than the sum of their parts.
This season is a wash, I’ve made my peace with that. If next season produces a similar result, ie, a middling record and no legit tournament shot, it will be time for a change. I hope the AD would see that, extension or not.
This season is a wash, I’ve made my peace with that. If next season produces a similar result, ie, a middling record and no legit tournament shot, it will be time for a change. I hope the AD would see that, extension or not.
Yup. Big guy, older, likes meat and potatoes and regattas.
Agreed, a Hardt hire would be safe and uninspiring. Paulson certainly would be getting an interview as would Nathan Davis. How old is Hardt? He has to be approaching retirement age or is this just wishful thinking.
The problem is - the fans, more so the fans on this message board - care more about athletics at UR than the UR administration does. I have said it before, and have heard others connected to the athletics program say it as well (quietly of course). The school cares about athletics, and will invest in it - but they will only invest enough to make it look like they care or to keep up with others. The goal is not to be a top level athletics program or be dominant in any given sport - as they feel this would be a detriment to the overall University with a watered down student body with athletes who do not have the grades to get into UR on their own as well as other sacrifices that might come along with trying to be a top level team in any given sport, which includes both financial and reputational risk.
Painful!
Unfortunately I think ur probably spot on with the above!
If CM was just extended, and if next season plays out per your second paragraph, I’d be shocked if Mooney would be bought out or let go. History tells us that no bar is low enough. They’ll ride with him until end of contract. But, but, but - probably in final year he’ll rip off a great year, and another extension will follow.
8legs1dream
Graduate Assistant
his defenders will reference last March for years and years to come as a sign that he should stick around.
We have spent money on our program. But would you say we spend more than VCU, Dayton, maybe even St. Louis? And when I say spend - I include things like facilities, staff, admissions, etc.
And then if we have spent just as much as others and continue not to win - then what does that say?
And then if we have spent just as much as others and continue not to win - then what does that say?
"Continue not to win"?? We and VCU have an NCAA and an NIT the last 2 seasons. St Louis and Dayton have 2 NITs and 0 NCAAs the last 2 seasons. And, the season before that we went 14-4 IC. Yet, we are different from them because we "continue not to win"?????? Oh yeah, we beat all 3 of these teams last year, but it is us who "continue not to win". LOL.
Last edited:
So much for A-10 at large bids. Win the tournament or go home.
Mooney wins the tournament once as a sixth seed and suddenly decides that's the winning strategy...
It’s wishful thinking on my part that someone was smart enough to draft a contract with appropriate out clauses. I know that some folks here think that’s ridiculous, but no one came sniffing after last years run, so why feel compelled to guarantee more than what’s reasonable.
Uh....he used the word "continue". "Continue not to win" would make recent years more relevant than 4+ years ago. And, shows just how inaccurate it is to say we "continue not to win". We are the reigning A-10 champs, but we "continue not to win"? Interesting take.
Well, I’m with you on what should be, but so far history is on Mooney’s side until proven differently.
Part of me wishes last year's A10 tournament tun hadn't happened so we could have gotten rid of Mooney and started fresh. Kind of like breaking up with a girlfriend right after great sex.
In the Mooney era (since 2005), Dayton has made the NCAA/ NIT 70.59% of the seasons. VCU since they have joined the A10 has made the NCAA/NIT 80% of the seasons. Davidson since they joined the A10 has made the NCAA/NIT 75% of the seasons.
Richmond in the Mooney era has made the NCAA/NIT 35.29% of the seasons. That’s in the second tier of the A10 during the Mooney era with URI, St. Louis, St. Joe’s, St. Bonnie, UMASS, and even Charlotte before they left (35.29%, 35.29%, 35.29%, 29.41%, 29.41%, and 37.5% respectively).
I think we spend the money of a first tier program, but we’re getting the returns of a second tier program. To me, that’s a coaching issue.
If you determine winning as winning a little more than you lose (say 55%) then I guess we care about winning. I actually see it the complete opposite…because we have invested heavily in a coach who has almost 20 years of proven results/data (unheard of at one school in competitive college athletics) then we have assured ourselves of never winning big (Like finishing higher than 3rd in the A-10). At this point I don’t know how you can watch a game like the Umass game (with the Minutemen missing key players and us having a conference poy candidate) and think that we have the best coach available….and to top it off we are paying him premium $. There is also no way you can convince me that we could have a better than a barely over .500 coach at a far more affordable salary.
Why copy my post? You should copy the one that said "continue not to win", and maybe tell him to reword it. And, I am not trying to convince you or anyone anything..I just share my opinion. I don't expect everyone to agree.
All of that is just so logical that I can’t help but agree that the issue is unreasonable fans. We should just get new ones.
🤣🤣🤣🤬🤬🤬
Is there? Maybe there is a pre 2020 bias? I mean, seems to me all these numbers would be more relevant if this were 2019. But, this is 2023, and the last 3 seasons were 24-7, NIT, and NCAA. So, if you are anti Mooney, maybe NIT and NCAA talk isn't the way to go right now?
Without trying to disagree, I do ask what weight the various results should get?
Too many here seem to feel 2006 should get the same or more than 2020.
On the other hand, should the last 3 years weigh more than the last 3 months?
So many on this board seem to feel everything is always awesome, or everything is always terrible…
I would certainly put more weight on recent years than going several years back, and other than having an agenda, I don't know how anyone would find the several years past more relevant than the more recent years. As far as this year is concerned, sure, judge us on the 21 games, but as of now, we are still the reigning A-10 champs.
8legs1dream
Graduate Assistant
Here is my issue....I was onboard the Mooney train early on..great ambassador, appears to do things the right way, aside from the text issue he had early on, he was rolling...2 NCAA appearances in the early 2010s....then he lost focus, failed on recruiting, didn't leverage the momentum he had and basically ripped us off for ~ 8yrs...yes the former and current ADs let him get away with it.....the post season was largely successful the last 3 yrs, but last year the credit has to go to the srs+ who basically took it upon themselves to win the URI (?) Game after a terrible 1st half and continue the run through Iowa....the regular season was a bust....we deserve better than an average coach.....in case you're curious, my frame of reference is my 4 undergrad yrs (1987-1991)...3 NCAA berths, including a sweet 16 and upset of syr! That's what I expect my coach to accomplish.....not the periodic success we are now seeing.....
Making it to the round of 32 shouldn’t be our only aspirations. We have several schools in our conference that have made the final 4. If we made the final four last year, different story. Every year a 12 seed beats a 5. We should expect more than round of 32 once a decade.
- Status
Similar threads
