Miller on the Mooney hire

[SFspidur]

Feel like most of this was known, but nice to get a little retrospective from Miller on how that hire went down. I probably knew that Mooney had never set foot on campus until the day he was introduced, but I'd forgotten.

I like his candid comments about Wainwright as well lol.

“Jerry was looking to move on, and we were looking to move on as well,” said Miller, UR’s AD 2000-12. DePaul came calling and “we did nothing to try to keep him (at UR), let’s put it that way,” said Miller. “Jerry could be a difficult person to deal with.”

In year No. 20, Chris Mooney deserves 'grade A,' per AD who hired him

“I just remember thinking, ‘That’s an incredible spot and I’d love to have the job.’ I just wasn’t sure if I could get it.”

richmond.com

 

[spiderstudent17]

Interesting how quickly he hired him. I was very young and obviously not a fan of UR at the time, but I find it interesting that Miller saw more than Mooney's record at the time which was 24-27 (47% winning percentage) in 2 years at Arcadia University and a 16-12 (60% winning percentage) one year at Air Force. Military academies are certainly harder to do well in and Air Force improved while he was there. I'm sure given Miller's VMI background he could appreciate that more and likely recognized the school policy's at UR, albeit different that Air Force, still may be more strict than other school schools and Mooney's experience in that area would be helpful here.

In Mooney's 20 years here, I would not give him an "A". Miller may be saying that because of the 10 year contract extension he gave Mooney after the sweet 16 run, which in hindsight was not a good decision. In general, I don't believe that coach's should have more than 4-5 years on their contract at a time. Personally, looking holistically at Mooney's time here over 20 years (giving him a little more leeway at the beginning) I would give him a "B-". Since 2019-2020 though (had 2 bad years but other 3 years were 24-17 and firmly NCAA bubble before COVID, winning A10 tournament + R32 NCAA, 23-10 + A10 regular season champ) I would give him an "A-"

 

[GKiller]

I think Miller was also regretful on missing out on Mckillop when we really could have got him over wainwright. & even tho old jer got that loaded team left by Beilein eventually into ncaa, a mckillop would have been a more seamless transition/style from JB. Now mckillop was actually a tough SOB but more of an offensive system guy “fluidity!” playing with supposedly lesser athletes with academics in mind. Mooney got us back to that mold in Miller view.

Got to lol at the ambiguous grow on the job & be a different coach after 20 years metric. Guess easy to give made up metrics an A when u have real metrics like ncaa appearances and record vs VCU that r F’s.

 

[gcarter52]

I think Miller was also regretful on missing out on Mckillop when we really could have got him over wainwright. & even tho old jer got that loaded team left by Beilein eventually into ncaa, a mckillop would have been a more seamless transition/style from JB. Now mckillop was actually a tough SOB but more of an offensive system guy “fluidity!” playing with supposedly lesser athletes with academics in mind. Mooney got us back to that mold in Miller view.

Got to lol at the ambiguous grow on the job & be a different coach after 20 years metric. Guess easy to give made up metrics an A when u have real metrics like ncaa appearances and record vs VCU that r F’s.

Good bye my friend!

 

[spider23]

How many years was Mooney an assistant at AFA?? Miller may be having some memory issues. The year prior to Mooney getting the HC job at AFA they went to the NCAA. The year he took over - with I believe it was the same starters - but not sure- they backtracked, and won less games. So a lot of revisionist history. I do think Mooney could be on an uptrend here, but yes the overall grade is very much debatable.

 

[urmite]

How many years was Mooney an assistant at AFA?? Miller may be having some memory issues. The year prior to Mooney getting the HC job at AFA they went to the NCAA. The year he took over - with I believe it was the same starters - but not sure- they backtracked, and won less games. So a lot of revisionist history. I do think Mooney could be on an uptrend here, but yes the overall grade is very much debatable.

Only 3 returned, Gerlach & Kuhle were gone…

 

[SpiderTrap]

Feel like most of this was known, but nice to get a little retrospective from Miller on how that hire went down. I probably knew that Mooney had never set foot on campus until the day he was introduced, but I'd forgotten.

I like his candid comments about Wainwright as well lol.

https://richmond.com/sports/college...8473128-2a4c-11ef-a09c-b7b194fdb3d2.html[/URL

Overall - the article is a fluff ...A appearances, he quickly becomes an A grade.

 

[Wood Hall]

Do you really expect the guy who hired him is going to be a tough grader? The Mooney hire is Miller's UR legacy. He's not going to grade him on the old, tougher university standard some of the profs used in my day instead of the standard 60-69 D, 70-79 C, 80-89 B and 90-100 A scale.

Given what the university wants: Competitive program, clean program, players graduating, players not embarrassing the University, occasional NCAA berth, decent attendance, Mooney's an A. No question.

Compared to what the fans want, not so much.

 

[urmite]

Do you really expect the guy who hired him is going to be a tough grader? The Mooney hire is Miller's UR legacy. He's not going to grade him on the old, tougher university standard some of the profs used in my day instead of the standard 60-69 D, 70-79 C, 80-89 B and 90-100 A scale.

Given what the university wants: Competitive program, clean program, players graduating, players not embarrassing the University, occasional NCAA berth, decent attendance, Mooney's an A. No question.

Compared to what the fans want, not so much.

I’m just glad they use those same criteria for all aspects of the university…

 

[ManiBenton]

The O’Connor tweet really made me blow a gasket. You know it’s bad when our rival fans talking about how much they love Mooney. An A grade is ridiculous

 

[GKiller]

Do you really expect the guy who hired him is going to be a tough grader? The Mooney hire is Miller's UR legacy. He's not going to grade him on the old, tougher university standard some of the profs used in my day instead of the standard 60-69 D, 70-79 C, 80-89 B and 90-100 A scale.

Given what the university wants: Competitive program, clean program, players graduating, players not embarrassing the University, occasional NCAA berth, decent attendance, Mooney's an A. No question.

Compared to what the fans want, not so much.

Nope. Plus it would really reflect on Miller if both his flagship hires in bball were poor, after he essentially gave Wainwright a poor grade. So yeah the good grade was expected it's just funny it's a "feelings" metric grade rather than using real performance metrics.

Also, all those things u list....Mooney didn't invent at Richmond. All those he inherited. They were there b4 for 20 years and would be expected with next coach too. Weird the school thinks Mooney does it better than others could when arguably 3 out of last 4 UR coaches did it just as well if not better. A few things maybe better some things worse, but the overall culture was there. Also let's remember we had major ncaa violation under Mooney and had to fire an assistant coach for it.

 

[AnnapSpider]

Do you really expect the guy who hired him is going to be a tough grader? The Mooney hire is Miller's UR legacy. He's not going to grade him on the old, tougher university standard some of the profs used in my day instead of the standard 60-69 D, 70-79 C, 80-89 B and 90-100 A scale.

Given what the university wants: Competitive program, clean program, players graduating, players not embarrassing the University, occasional NCAA berth, decent attendance, Mooney's an A. No question.

Compared to what the fans want, not so much.

How do you know what fans want? Maybe the majority is happy with what we have, and the hand full of posters on this board are just
unrealistic zealots

 

[Wood Hall]

Nope. Plus it would really reflect on Miller if both his flagship hires in bball were poor, after he essentially gave Wainwright a poor grade. So yeah the good grade was expected it's just funny it's a "feelings" metric grade rather than using real performance metrics.

Also, all those things u list....Mooney didn't invent at Richmond. All those he inherited. They were there b4 for 20 years and would be expected with next coach too. Weird the school thinks Mooney does it better than others could when arguably 3 out of last 4 UR coaches did it just as well if not better. A few things maybe better some things worse, but the overall culture was there. Also let's remember we had major ncaa violation under Mooney and had to fire an assistant coach for it.

Doesn't matter if the things on that list were there before; in fact, things regressed under Wainwright. They were re-established and continued under Mooney, and that's what he's getting graded on.

 

[Eight Legger]

Miller and Mooney

 

[Spiders4ever]

Don't stop believin'

 

[ManiBenton]

How do you know what fans want? Maybe the majority is happy with what we have, and the hand full of posters on this board are just
unrealistic zealots

You make it seem like these “unrealistic zealots” are asking for final four and sweet sixteen appearances. We aren’t we just don’t think a guy who had a 10 year ncaa tournament drought deserves an A grade. You and your Mooney cult wants to stick with the loser, we want something new and better because Richmond can easily attain a better coach than Mooney. No question

 

[PASpider]

I don’t understand Miller’s comment about being interested in someone that could maintain success at a military academy for years. Mooney was the head coach at Air Force for one year, right?

Also, why the need to move through this coaching search so fast? It seems he was more looking for someone Miller could get along with than the most qualified for the job. Not saying Miller should have to pick a qualified jerk, but I’m sure there were a lot of candidates out there that could have been brought in before settling for the nice guy who’s easy to work with. As Mooney said, he didn’t have much of a resume, so I’m sure we weren’t having to snatch him up quickly before others grabbed him.

 

[SpiderTrap]

My grade on Mooney right now would be a B. I am not sure how you could give an A for 3 (maybe 4 NCAA appearances in 19 years). Outside of wins and losses and NCAA appearances, he is a perfect fit for UR in terms of academics, his background, brings in good kids, etc. And in the win column - he generally wins - I think only 4-5 seasons were losing seasons in those 19 years. So typically - a middle or above team in our league. But the lack of appearances witholds the A grade.

Not sure how many teams we strive to compete with - like a Dayton, Xavier, VCU, etc - would give their coach a A grade for 4 appearances in 19 years (not even sure they would make it 19 years in those places).

BUT - he does seem to surprisingly adapted well to the portal so far. I am very interested to see how the higher up recruits from UCONN and Michigan fair for UR this year - as their success or lack of success could lead to more or less of these type of transfers, guys moving down and looking for more playing time.

 

[AnnapSpider]

You make it seem like these “unrealistic zealots” are asking for final four and sweet sixteen appearances. We aren’t we just don’t think a guy who had a 10 year ncaa tournament drought deserves an A grade. You and your Mooney cult wants to stick with the loser, we want something new and better because Richmond can easily attain a better coach than Mooney. No question

“Mooney cult”. sounds like a personal zealot attacking supporters of
our team and coach to me.

 

[GKiller]

I don’t understand Miller’s comment about being interested in someone that could maintain success at a military academy for years. Mooney was the head coach at Air Force for one year, right?

Also, why the need to move through this coaching search so fast? It seems he was more looking for someone Miller could get along with than the most qualified for the job. Not saying Miller should have to pick a qualified jerk, but I’m sure there were a lot of candidates out there that could have been brought in before settling for the nice guy who’s easy to work with. As Mooney said, he didn’t have much of a resume, so I’m sure we weren’t having to snatch him up quickly before others grabbed him.

Miller grade on Miller coaching search: A

 

[spider23]

“Mooney cult”. sounds like a personal zealot attacking supporters of
our team and coach to me.

No just the coach

 

[spider23]

Miller grade on Miller coaching search: A

I know shocking.
You should see my semi annual self reviews at work 🤣🤣🤣

 

[AnnapSpider]

No just the coach

My original post said that “maybe the majority is happy with Mooney”.
You know as well as I do, that posters on this site are far more demanding than the average fan- hence the zealot remark. But supporters of Mooney aren’t a cult. They are just happy with a coach
that puts a good team on the floor, and really don’t sit around
and count NCAA appearances.

 

[RichmondNative]

The full quote is “If you use as your metrics somebody who is a good fit and has grown into the job, I think he’s a grade A,” said Miller. “He did grow. He is a very different coach today than he was 20 years ago, as you would guess and hope for.”

I think that the “A” isn’t far off the mark using the criteria as defined. Mooney is a very good/excellent fit in terms of what the college administration wants and especially recently he has shown the ability to adapt and “grow”.

By any other criteria, I agree with others that the overall rating is around a B.

 

[spider23]

I think next couple years will be very telling. I do think he is typically in the top 1/4th of coaches in the A10 - when he has the talent. That has been the problem in the past, whoever might be to blame. Last year, I thought did very well obviously - BUT at critical junctures underperformed - big games OOC and then A10 tournament. The end of year may have been a bit of King just wearing down, but flipside is that we were over reliant on him for offense, and undeniably in my mind - we took foot off the pedal and a little too celebratory for the regular season. I get it - human nature - BUT that is where coach comes in as well. I wouldnt have minded nearly as much if we had beat BC and one out of FLA or Colorado - which I think may have put us in.

But anyway, it seems that Mooney will be able to get the talent based on portal and hs recruiting in the portal era, so expectations are lets be at the top of the A10 again, and find a way into NCAA.

 

[ManiBenton]

“Mooney cult”. sounds like a personal zealot attacking supporters of
our team and coach to me.

I never trash the players and I respect them. Never once have I trashed a player on this board and I will never do that. However, I will trash our coach who throughout his 20 year tenure has underperformed majority of his time here. And maybe the “average” fan needs to look at our scenario a bit more. How can someone be content with a man who received a 10 year extension and quite frankly has sucked since?

 

[8legs1dream]

I think next couple years will be very telling. I do think he is typically in the top 1/4th of coaches in the A10 - when he has the talent. That has been the problem in the past, whoever might be to blame. Last year, I thought did very well obviously - BUT at critical junctures underperformed - big games OOC and then A10 tournament. The end of year may have been a bit of King just wearing down, but flipside is that we were over reliant on him for offense, and undeniably in my mind - we took foot off the pedal and a little too celebratory for the regular season. I get it - human nature - BUT that is where coach comes in as well. I wouldnt have minded nearly as much if we had beat BC and one out of FLA or Colorado - which I think may have put us in.

But anyway, it seems that Mooney will be able to get the talent based on portal and hs recruiting in the portal era, so expectations are lets be at the top of the A10 again, and find a way into NCAA.

I think we needed to basically sweep the non-conference to get in (one L would have been ok as long as it was to one of the big names). Sadly the crash and burn A10 first round put a swift end to any at-large talk so it was all moot anyways.

 

[SpiderTrap]

At the end of the day - it doesn't really matter. I am in the camp that believes Mooney has reached "lifetime contract" status with UR - in theory. He never loses enough for the administration to think about firing him, and with the recent medical events he endured, success last few years - NCAA tourney and A10 regular season champs - with him entering year 20 - unless he had a major NCAA rules violation or all of sudden we turn into Fordham and finish last place for like 5 straight years - I don't see any reason why the school would ever get rid of him. I don't think he has to make another NCAA tourney - I think he just has to stay on his current winning percentage - win about 60% of the games, and he is at UR until he decides to retire.

 

[spiderstudent17]

I agree with several of the points in this thread that NCAA tournament appearance (3 in 20 years; 15%) and beating VCU (9-25 record; 25% winning) are two very (arguably most) important markers of a successful season. However, I'm sure in the eyes of the administration, their criteria for a successful season is more nuanced than just making the NCAA tournament since only 19% (68/351) teams make the NCAA tournament every year or beating VCU as we also play around 30 other games in a season.

For instance, I would say, that last year, while disappointing in the end, was a successful year given we won an A10 regular season championship, were a 1 seed in the A10 tournament, and finished with a record of 23-10. The 2014-2015 season, we finished 21-14, were the 4 seed in A10 tournament, the 1 seed in NIT, & went to the NIT quarterfinals. In 2016-2017 season, we finished 22-13, were the 3 seed in the A10 tournament, and went to the NIT quarter finals. In 2019-2020, we were 24-7 and 2nd seed in A10 tournament and firmly in at-large bubble (though not guaranteed) vs. being in the NIT as a 1 or 2 seed. And of course we made the NCAA's in 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2021-2022.

So looking at it like that we have had "successful seasons" the following years since Mooney became coach: '10, '11, '15, '17, '20, '22, and '24. So that's a 7/19 seasons or ~37% successful season rate. Additionally, most coaches typically get a grace period of about 3-4 years when they first join a program to get in the recruits they want and implement their offensive/defensive scheme. So, not factoring in the first 4 years for Mooney (where it sounds like he started out without the full allotment of scholarship players) he could have what's seen by the administration as a 7/15 seasons or ~47% successful season rate equally spread out over 15 years. We have finished as a top 4 seed in the A10, 7 times since Mooney joined in the 2005-2006 season. Add all this to the fact that Mooney is a Princeton graduate, is a very nice person, has a good graduation rate with players, runs a clean program, represents the school well, and has had this level of success with likely harder recruiting restrictions for academic reasons, I can see why the administration is happy with the results despite the most glaring lack of NCAA tournament appearance and 25% win rate vs. VCU.

For me, looking forward is the most important thing. I don't know what has changed. Likely some combination of getting a practice facility, the loosening of academic restrictions, new assistant coaching staff perspectives, Mooney's change of coaching schemes (with defense), and the new NIL/portal era, but we've done very well the past several years and are getting the highest caliber of recruits we have ever gotten. Let's keep this momentum going.

 

[brooklyn brownstone]

So discounting his first 4 years makes zero sense. I’ll give you year 1 after ole Jer but that’s it. That team had actual talent too, but zero guards unfortunately, and Steenberge wasn’t a fit for the Moon offense (nor was Moliva) so the whole year was a bust.

But year 2 Geriot, Butler and Gonzo arrived.
Year 3 KA and Harp and K. Smith.

He absolutely gets judged on those teams.

 

[SpiderTrap]

I don't really like the argument that very few teams make the NCAA tournament every year or a consistent basis - therefore - we are not able to do so.

How did VCU climb that mountain? And I am not picking on VCU because they are our rival - I am picking on them because they followed the same exact path to the A10 as we did. Played in CAA for many years. Was generally a good CAA team. Moved up to A10. Same city and geographic location. VCU was in the CAA for 17 years and made the NCAA tourney 5 times - with one of them being the final four season. UR - while a member of the CAA for 16 years - made the tourney 5 times as well. With some Giant Killer upsets along the way.

Yet - we both make the jump to the A10 and we make it less in the A10 than we did in the CAA, and VCU on the other hand has turned into a tourney team every year or every other year schedule. Is it difficult - yes. Does it take buy from the administration - yes. Can it be done - yes. And maybe the transfer portal will really help us - especially with admissions. Maybe they will look better upon kids who have completed 2 years of college and survived, rather than take a chance on a HS kid with just okay grades. Maybe this is the turning point.

 

[spider23]

Trap - in addition we have a leafy campus. Though that possibly is a positive for VCU??

 

[97spiderfan]

This is the most JOC article ever. What does he expect Miller to say? He hired him, he gave him a 10 year extension, he still maintains a close relationship with UR and probably with Mooney as well. Does anyone think that even in Miller's heart of hearts he doesn't feel the hire was an "A" that he is going to say that to a reporter to be published in the RTD? Heck no.

 

[8legs1dream]

I agree with several of the points in this thread that NCAA tournament appearance (3 in 20 years; 15%) and beating VCU (9-25 record; 25% winning) are two very (arguably most) important markers of a successful season. However, I'm sure in the eyes of the administration, their criteria for a successful season is more nuanced than just making the NCAA tournament since only 19% (68/351) teams make the NCAA tournament every year or beating VCU as we also play around 30 other games in a season.

For instance, I would say, that last year, while disappointing in the end, was a successful year given we won an A10 regular season championship, were a 1 seed in the A10 tournament, and finished with a record of 23-10. The 2014-2015 season, we finished 21-14, were the 4 seed in A10 tournament, the 1 seed in NIT, & went to the NIT quarterfinals. In 2016-2017 season, we finished 22-13, were the 3 seed in the A10 tournament, and went to the NIT quarter finals. In 2019-2020, we were 24-7 and 2nd seed in A10 tournament and firmly in at-large bubble (though not guaranteed) vs. being in the NIT as a 1 or 2 seed. And of course we made the NCAA's in 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2021-2022.

So looking at it like that we have had "successful seasons" the following years since Mooney became coach: '10, '11, '15, '17, '20, '22, and '24. So that's a 7/19 seasons or ~37% successful season rate. Additionally, most coaches typically get a grace period of about 3-4 years when they first join a program to get in the recruits they want and implement their offensive/defensive scheme. So, not factoring in the first 4 years for Mooney (where it sounds like he started out without the full allotment of scholarship players) he could have what's seen by the administration as a 7/15 seasons or ~47% successful season rate equally spread out over 15 years. We have finished as a top 4 seed in the A10, 7 times since Mooney joined in the 2005-2006 season. Add all this to the fact that Mooney is a Princeton graduate, is a very nice person, has a good graduation rate with players, runs a clean program, represents the school well, and has had this level of success with likely harder recruiting restrictions for academic reasons, I can see why the administration is happy with the results despite the most glaring lack of NCAA tournament appearance and 25% win rate vs. VCU.

For me, looking forward is the most important thing. I don't know what has changed. Likely some combination of getting a practice facility, the loosening of academic restrictions, new assistant coaching staff perspectives, Mooney's change of coaching schemes (with defense), and the new NIL/portal era, but we've done very well the past several years and are getting the highest caliber of recruits we have ever gotten. Let's keep this momentum going.

There is a whole lot of reaching in that post man. Lots of tired Mooney Cult talking points with some fresh ones thrown in to spice it up.

 

[VT4700]

My goodness, some of u get so bothered by any positive comments thrown Mooney's way. 97 is correct...of course Miller will give him an A. But, a lot of Spider fans would as well. Plenty of people are very happy with the job Mooney has done, and it is fine that plenty of you guys are not. Not too many coaches out there get 100% support, so I get it. But, any discussions about this always leads to attacks on those that support Mooney, instead of accepting either opinion

 

[SpiderDogg]

I agree with several of the points in this thread that NCAA tournament appearance (3 in 20 years; 15%) and beating VCU (9-25 record; 25% winning) are two very (arguably most) important markers of a successful season. However, I'm sure in the eyes of the administration, their criteria for a successful season is more nuanced than just making the NCAA tournament since only 19% (68/351) teams make the NCAA tournament every year or beating VCU as we also play around 30 other games in a season.

For instance, I would say, that last year, while disappointing in the end, was a successful year given we won an A10 regular season championship, were a 1 seed in the A10 tournament, and finished with a record of 23-10. The 2014-2015 season, we finished 21-14, were the 4 seed in A10 tournament, the 1 seed in NIT, & went to the NIT quarterfinals. In 2016-2017 season, we finished 22-13, were the 3 seed in the A10 tournament, and went to the NIT quarter finals. In 2019-2020, we were 24-7 and 2nd seed in A10 tournament and firmly in at-large bubble (though not guaranteed) vs. being in the NIT as a 1 or 2 seed. And of course we made the NCAA's in 2009-2010, 2010-2011, and 2021-2022.

So looking at it like that we have had "successful seasons" the following years since Mooney became coach: '10, '11, '15, '17, '20, '22, and '24. So that's a 7/19 seasons or ~37% successful season rate. Additionally, most coaches typically get a grace period of about 3-4 years when they first join a program to get in the recruits they want and implement their offensive/defensive scheme. So, not factoring in the first 4 years for Mooney (where it sounds like he started out without the full allotment of scholarship players) he could have what's seen by the administration as a 7/15 seasons or ~47% successful season rate equally spread out over 15 years. We have finished as a top 4 seed in the A10, 7 times since Mooney joined in the 2005-2006 season. Add all this to the fact that Mooney is a Princeton graduate, is a very nice person, has a good graduation rate with players, runs a clean program, represents the school well, and has had this level of success with likely harder recruiting restrictions for academic reasons, I can see why the administration is happy with the results despite the most glaring lack of NCAA tournament appearance and 25% win rate vs. VCU.

For me, looking forward is the most important thing. I don't know what has changed. Likely some combination of getting a practice facility, the loosening of academic restrictions, new assistant coaching staff perspectives, Mooney's change of coaching schemes (with defense), and the new NIL/portal era, but we've done very well the past several years and are getting the highest caliber of recruits we have ever gotten. Let's keep this momentum going.

Summary:
I agree that NCAA tournament appearances and beating VCU are crucial markers of a successful season. However, the administration likely has a more nuanced view, considering achievements like winning the A10 regular season championship and advancing in the NIT. Coach Mooney's tenure has seen several successful seasons, particularly after the initial years of building the program, leading to a roughly 47% success rate in the past 15 years. Looking ahead, recent improvements and high-caliber recruits suggest a positive trajectory for the program.

 

[spiderstudent17]

There is a whole lot of reaching in that post man. Lots of tired Mooney Cult talking points with some fresh ones thrown in to spice it up.

How so? I want to clarify that my own expectations and approach is likely different than our administration. My standards are NCAA and winning championships as the most important markers of success at the end of the day. What I would do if I was athletic director leading our athletics is a lot different. However, I am trying to understand more what the administration's mindset might be and to an extent can agree with it.

With the NCAA - there are currently 36 at-large spots. This is an educated guess, but I would say that teams in the top 10 conferences (P6 + AAC, MWC, A10, WCC) likely spend around as much as us or more in terms of resources with basketball. So is it fair to say that there are around 90-100 teams who meet that criteria all vying for 36 spots? Spots that continue to make it harder for mid-majors as power conference schools are trying to squeeze out mid majors by scheduling more conference games and not play mid-majors OOC. Didn't the Bonnies miss the NCAA's like 7-8 years ago with an RPI in the 20s or 30s? Unfortunately, mid-majors often get the short-end of the stick in this regard, which is why a black and white decision of making the NCAA or not isn't always the end-all-be-all when looking at the larger body of work of a team's season.

There is no question that VCU and even Dayton have been the gold standard in this conference in terms of what we can achieve. I absolutely believe that our mentality should be to look to match and exceed what they've done. We're both in the same conference after all. If they can do it then we should be able to as well irrespective of school size, profile, academic requirements, etc. The question is what is the best approach to that? Saint Joseph's fired Martelli in 2019 after he had won the A10 tournament and made the NCAAs in 2014 and 2016. Not to mention he went to the NCAAs 5 times before that and had an elite 8 team. I respect the mentality the SJU AD had in making the decision, but was it the right decision? Saint Joseph's haven't achieved anything since then. UR probably felt that the best approach was removing road blocks that have held Mooney back (i.e. building a practice facility, loosening academic requirements per reports of posters here) rather than getting a new coach.

Regardless of whether Mooney should have been fired or not years ago and the reasons why he had not been fired, the fact of the matter is he is our coach right now. In the last 5 years we've had, what I would consider pretty great seasons 2019-20: 24-7, 2nd seed A10, squarely at-large before COVID, 2021-2022: A10 tournament champions + R32 NCAA, and 2023-2024: A10 regular season champion, 20+ wins with a lot of new recruits. Mooney just won A10 coach of the year and we are getting the best recruits we have ever gotten. I don't know what has changed, but these are the results I expect from a coach that we pay $1.5 million. That's why I've given him an A- during this time as opposed to a B- over the last 19 years.

 

[97spiderfan]

How so? I want to clarify that my own expectations and approach is likely different than our administration. My standards are NCAA and winning championships as the most important markers of success at the end of the day. What I would do if I was athletic director leading our athletics is a lot different. However, I am trying to understand more what the administration's mindset might be and to an extent can agree with it.

With the NCAA - there are currently 36 at-large spots. This is an educated guess, but I would say that teams in the top 10 conferences (P6 + AAC, MWC, A10, WCC) likely spend around as much as us or more in terms of resources with basketball. So is it fair to say that there are around 90-100 teams who meet that criteria all vying for 36 spots? Spots that continue to make it harder for mid-majors as power conference schools are trying to squeeze out mid majors by scheduling more conference games and not play mid-majors OOC. Didn't the Bonnies miss the NCAA's like 7-8 years ago with an RPI in the 20s or 30s? Unfortunately, mid-majors often get the short-end of the stick in this regard, which is why a black and white decision of making the NCAA or not isn't always the end-all-be-all when looking at the larger body of work of a team's season.

There is no question that VCU and even Dayton have been the gold standard in this conference in terms of what we can achieve. I absolutely believe that our mentality should be to look to match and exceed what they've done. We're both in the same conference after all. If they can do it then we should be able to as well irrespective of school size, profile, academic requirements, etc. The question is what is the best approach to that? Saint Joseph's fired Martelli in 2019 after he had won the A10 tournament and made the NCAAs in 2014 and 2016. Not to mention he went to the NCAAs 5 times before that and had an elite 8 team. I respect the mentality the SJU AD had in making the decision, but was it the right decision? Saint Joseph's haven't achieved anything since then. UR probably felt that the best approach was removing road blocks that have held Mooney back (i.e. building a practice facility, loosening academic requirements per reports of posters here) rather than getting a new coach.

Regardless of whether Mooney should have been fired or not years ago and the reasons why he had not been fired, the fact of the matter is he is our coach right now. In the last 5 years we've had, what I would consider pretty great seasons 2019-20: 24-7, 2nd seed A10, squarely at-large before COVID, 2021-2022: A10 tournament champions + R32 NCAA, and 2023-2024: A10 regular season champion, 20+ wins with a lot of new recruits. Mooney just won A10 coach of the year and we are getting the best recruits we have ever gotten. I don't know what has changed, but these are the results I expect from a coach that we pay $1.5 million. That's why I've given him an A- during this time as opposed to a B- over the last 19 years.

All good points, but if you giving him an A-, you have to consider the 8 year period between 2011 and 2019, when we made 0 NCAA and only 2 NIT's.

I do agree that things seem to be on an upswing but I also think there is a recency bias in your grading. I'd have him more at a C+, maybe with the past few years and where the program is right now, I could push that up to a B-. But 3 NCAA's over 19 years, no way is that an A- grade.

 

[spiderstudent17]

Another way to think about my NCAA point. Let’s say in 2019-2020 we finished the regular season with a 26-8 record (losing in the A10 championship) and we were left out of the NCAAs because the committee decided to put an 18-14 Mississippi State as an at-large. Should that take away from our great season? NCAA appearance IS the most important thing in my book, but we (and all mid majors) are climbing an uphill battle here. That’s why it should be a little more nuanced than whether we make the NCAAs or not and look at the larger body of work in the season. Same with beating VCU. I hate losing to VCU and want us to beat them every game. I also hate the excuse that because they are a larger school and have easier academics we can’t “compete” with them. Bottom line is we are in the same conference as them and the expectation should be to beat them in recruiting battles and on-the court. But if we lost twice to them one year and finished 24-9 and win the regular season championship and missed out on the NCAA, would that be a failure of a season? In my eyes, no.

 

[GKiller]

I don't really like the argument that very few teams make the NCAA tournament every year or a consistent basis - therefore - we are not able to do so.

How did VCU climb that mountain? And I am not picking on VCU because they are our rival - I am picking on them because they followed the same exact path to the A10 as we did. Played in CAA for many years. Was generally a good CAA team. Moved up to A10. Same city and geographic location. VCU was in the CAA for 17 years and made the NCAA tourney 5 times - with one of them being the final four season. UR - while a member of the CAA for 16 years - made the tourney 5 times as well. With some Giant Killer upsets along the way.

Yet - we both make the jump to the A10 and we make it less in the A10 than we did in the CAA, and VCU on the other hand has turned into a tourney team every year or every other year schedule. Is it difficult - yes. Does it take buy from the administration - yes. Can it be done - yes. And maybe the transfer portal will really help us - especially with admissions. Maybe they will look better upon kids who have completed 2 years of college and survived, rather than take a chance on a HS kid with just okay grades. Maybe this is the turning point.

careful Trap u r on the edge of being a labeled a VCU fan or being told to go root for them