Just another example of money spent and time invested in a bust. I wouldn't want Mooney running my business.
Ford Gone
- Thread starter SFspidur
- Start date
Are you suggesting that Ford was just trying to figure out if MGCCC had room or not before pulling the trigger on his decision to transfer from a D1 program to a Community College?
I am just waiting for the next move. Like who is the next player to exit the program before the season starts.
There are BAD losses of players and there are GOOD losses of players. This happens to be a good loss, and to not differentiate the two is short-sighted. P. Ford, in my estimation was the least college-ready and A-10 ready player we have recruited in a long time.
P Ford was also the last guy we added to our class last year, for those who follow the timing of recruits. Usually our last schooly goes to a guy who is marginal, and may be based more on "potential" than current skills. I reported on here last summer that P Ford had a 1% or under probability of playing as a freshman. He was by far the least ready. This was also clear to anyone who watched practices last year. He had NO outside shot, none whatsoever. This, like a few other "losses" is actually a "win," because it opens up a spot for a recruit who has a chance to play.
Sure, we have had two player losses that will hurt, on the floor, and both Khwan and Buck fall into that category. I join those of you who are disappointed and/or angry to lose these two guys who could have helped us in a big way next season. What I do not know yet is WHY exactly these two guys left, and whether the coaches did everything possible to keep them. We may never know the answer to this Q.
However, this transfer is totally different, since P Ford (based on his skills) was unlikely to ever see the floor in a UR uniform. If we have posters here who like to take up schoolies with players who will not contribute, then fine. If you prefer to have guys on the team who have a chance to contribute, then be happy that this may be a win/win for UR and for the player. I believe the coaches, if they had some say in this transfer, are to be commended for this one.
P Ford was also the last guy we added to our class last year, for those who follow the timing of recruits. Usually our last schooly goes to a guy who is marginal, and may be based more on "potential" than current skills. I reported on here last summer that P Ford had a 1% or under probability of playing as a freshman. He was by far the least ready. This was also clear to anyone who watched practices last year. He had NO outside shot, none whatsoever. This, like a few other "losses" is actually a "win," because it opens up a spot for a recruit who has a chance to play.
Sure, we have had two player losses that will hurt, on the floor, and both Khwan and Buck fall into that category. I join those of you who are disappointed and/or angry to lose these two guys who could have helped us in a big way next season. What I do not know yet is WHY exactly these two guys left, and whether the coaches did everything possible to keep them. We may never know the answer to this Q.
However, this transfer is totally different, since P Ford (based on his skills) was unlikely to ever see the floor in a UR uniform. If we have posters here who like to take up schoolies with players who will not contribute, then fine. If you prefer to have guys on the team who have a chance to contribute, then be happy that this may be a win/win for UR and for the player. I believe the coaches, if they had some say in this transfer, are to be commended for this one.
But, is this any different than recruiting a guy who stays here for 4 years and never plays? No team plays 13 guys and every program has multiple guys who come and go and hardly ever play. This latest news could end up being better than one of these examples because now we have a spot open.
He (Ford) was merely another miss of which we have had more than our share. Or, perhaps, another player with potential that the current staff failed to acknowledge and attempt to develop. Whatever. He's gone.
The search for the elusive grad transfer continues:
I really don't like the trend of player bashing when someone decides to leave the program.
Marley, Trying to compare Paul F to P Ford is an interesting one. Since I would prefer not to appear "insensitive" I should probably totally duck the question, but will instead try to be as diplomatic as possible.
The key difference in my mind is how long the two recruits we are looking at occupied a spot on our roster without making a meaningful contribution. If that is the criteria then Paul may be considered by some to have been the more significant "mistake." I do not see it as a bad mistake to bring a player in for a "try-out' year and to then mutually agree on parting ways, which is probably what happened with P Ford. However, I see it as far more damaging to the program to bring in a player that we all want to cheer for but who remains on the roster for 4 + seasons without contributing. The first example (P Ford) is an example of "learning from our mistakes." We can afford to do that with one recruit each year, in my view. The second example, of of a recruit who does not contribute for 4+ seasons, is harder because it costs us close to 10% of our roster for 4+ years, which adds up to a lot of "opportunity cost." Our fans who loved PF will probably disagree, but if our criteria is wining basketball games then PF's tenure at the RC was not a highly productive one.
The key difference in my mind is how long the two recruits we are looking at occupied a spot on our roster without making a meaningful contribution. If that is the criteria then Paul may be considered by some to have been the more significant "mistake." I do not see it as a bad mistake to bring a player in for a "try-out' year and to then mutually agree on parting ways, which is probably what happened with P Ford. However, I see it as far more damaging to the program to bring in a player that we all want to cheer for but who remains on the roster for 4 + seasons without contributing. The first example (P Ford) is an example of "learning from our mistakes." We can afford to do that with one recruit each year, in my view. The second example, of of a recruit who does not contribute for 4+ seasons, is harder because it costs us close to 10% of our roster for 4+ years, which adds up to a lot of "opportunity cost." Our fans who loved PF will probably disagree, but if our criteria is wining basketball games then PF's tenure at the RC was not a highly productive one.
Yeah, that sucks but that's what's happening in the country these days. Used to be a thing called manners. And I'm even not that old. At least I don't think I am.
Can we all say in one loud voice......DUMPSTER FIRE!!! Wow this is gonna take a decade to fix even w a new coach. What decent recruit would want to step into this chit show?
Then he shouldn't make a definitive statement.
Also, he made that statement shortly before the Buckingham dismissal. I suppose he couldn't possibly know that was in the works? Did Hardt completely blindside him?
Open spots for Mooney is not the issue. He wins the prize. How he fills the spots is all together a different problem.
Not a huge surprise.
He has a ton of athletic ability but didn’t seem to have a great feel for the game. I was chalking that up to lack of time on the court as he had several injuries during his HS career.
IMO he wasn’t a great fit for CM’s style of play. But I wouldn’t be surprised if he ended up contributing somewhere,at some point in his career, that values the type of player he could be.
He has a ton of athletic ability but didn’t seem to have a great feel for the game. I was chalking that up to lack of time on the court as he had several injuries during his HS career.
IMO he wasn’t a great fit for CM’s style of play. But I wouldn’t be surprised if he ended up contributing somewhere,at some point in his career, that values the type of player he could be.
Last edited:
As stated the 1st time we saw his highlight tape, not a major college level player. College level athlete, YES. College level offensive skills, NO, not even close. This is yet another indictment of the coaching staff, not the player.
Trashing our players on the way out? Kid looked real good, athletic, banging threes in highlight video from two years ago. Even if the highlights were a little exaggerated - as they typically are - in a year to focus with our coaches, they should have had this kid ready. You and Oldie really trashing what appears to be a fine young man with what was a nice skill set before matriculating.
Looks better than some of the other highlights I have seen. 6'9", dribble left/right, splashy splashy from 3, explode for dunk.
I liked talking a chance on a guy like Phoenix. we took a guy with great upside due to athleticism and size. unfortunate that it didn't work out.
I don't think it affects us on the court, though. anyone projecting he'd play this year was just guessing. Cayo and Sal would be ahead of him at forward for sure, and likely Verbinskis. maybe he'd battle Grace for Grant's backup minutes, but I think Cayo slides over for those.
no spiteful dismissal to avoid embarrassment here, so that's good ... lol.
as for Mooney's "no other departures" quote, I think it's most likely he didn't think there would be. but even if he did, I think you have to answer the way he did if you don't know for sure anyone is done. you can't open that can of worms.
but yes, this goes down as another recruiting miss for those keeping count. we still have a lot of talent on the roster, though. next man up.
I don't think it affects us on the court, though. anyone projecting he'd play this year was just guessing. Cayo and Sal would be ahead of him at forward for sure, and likely Verbinskis. maybe he'd battle Grace for Grant's backup minutes, but I think Cayo slides over for those.
no spiteful dismissal to avoid embarrassment here, so that's good ... lol.
as for Mooney's "no other departures" quote, I think it's most likely he didn't think there would be. but even if he did, I think you have to answer the way he did if you don't know for sure anyone is done. you can't open that can of worms.
but yes, this goes down as another recruiting miss for those keeping count. we still have a lot of talent on the roster, though. next man up.
No trashing of anybody. Different people can see different things. The vision of some will be more accurate than others.
Trashing? I said this was not a big deal because he has never played for us and he wasn't going to be in our top 7, and maybe not in our rotation at all. My goodness, the way you talk about some of our recruits and players and you call this trashing? Wow.
So comments about not seeing the floor really confuses me considering the fact he handles the ball well and can dribble with either hand. Shooting did not look bad, plus he seems very athletic. Having not seen him at a practice, defending Grant or Cayo, I cannot make a valid observation of what would have happened this year. But he sure looked similar to some of Deon Taylor's tapes and much better than a lot of big man tapes at UR.
Was he not picking up on Mooney's system both offensively and defensively? Agree seems like a great young man and to think that after red shirting you would be third in line can be frustrating but I would think he would be part of two deep at both the 4 & 5 positions.
You are worse, the way you talk as if you have inside information. Certain on our rotations as you seem. Wow.
Inside information? Who would have expected him to be ahead of Grant, Nate, or Sal in the rotation? Would you have?
Sal? He has not shown any ability to be a D1 contributor. I thought Ulla said Verbinskis doing well in scrimmages. Has had 300+ days to learn the Mooney system and access to the coaches. Sounds like a gym rat.
why do you have a hard time believing in Sal when he's one of our highest rated recruits like ever, by multiple sources?
Weaver said that in addition to explaining how the college has changed over time — for one thing, it started out as Hagerstown Junior College before the name was changed to Hagerstown Community College — the book also documents the struggles it supporters faced, from getting it started to involving the community and expandin
Sorry, when dude I knew played there it was JUCO. All the CC's I'm familiar with are walk on type of deals, not organized to the point of JC's - but looks like that is not the case really. just my understanding. In any case, you I and 4700 will be happier when Mooney is gone.
Sure. Add Tomas as a guy who would have been ahead of Ford. Seems like you are only helping my argument and hurting yours with your ongoing need to get on everything I post.
As long as PQ has his way, and he will - Mooney will be here. That's the way the world works, Money talks.
His departure is part of the big picture. The big picture & patterns don't look very good. There are systemic problems with Mooney at the helm. Maybe you disagree?
Conversely, now we hear all the Mooney supporters who touted this guy and other failed signings all of a sudden asserting that this guy is not that good anyway. The fact is, Mooney recruits a lot of players of low ability and can’t even keep them on his team.
Yes, Pitt has extinguished the fire, and just walking around the smoldering ruins assessing, calling the insurance agent, getting some materials, etc.
We are still in the throwing dry planks of wood into the belly of the beast stage.
Similar threads
