Every VCU game now is filled with dread. Just waiting for Big Brother to punch us in the face and steal our lunch money.
NIL will change college basketball forever
- Thread starter UR80sfan
- Start date
off the top of my head you have Tarrant Dooley Belien and Wainwright. So i count 4 not 1. But i have no idea if 17-16 them is right
So true.
Am waiting on someone to refute you with cherry picked numbers or isolated time periods to show how well CM has performed or to show momentum.
LT .55 carved in stone.
But I think what goes along with this conversation is the "expectations". It is clear that the administration is fine with the expectation of just being "competitive" - which in my definition just means most years your middle of the pack, and every once in a while you will rise to the top. Mooney has far and away met that expectation and as a result - continues to be the UR coach. And I think with your definition of players who fit UR academically and athletically - being able to compete is very possible - the last 12 years have shown that.
But I think there is a section of the fan base that wants more. Wants more consistency at the top, and wants to do more than compete. And I think in order to do that in this day and age of AAU driven, specialized players, social media, etc players - lower standards (not easier to get in as athlete) is needed to make that come true. Now - even if the school lowered standards for hoops players - success is not automatic. Coaches still have to find those kids, recruit them, get them to UR, and get them to succeed at UR (both on and off the court). Not an easy task - but the hard part to begin is getting the talent to UR, and this would remove that barrier a little bit.
so the Jerry Wainwright recruiting method? that worked out great. what percentage of his recruits lasted 4 years?
there are plenty of reasonably smart kids to recruit. Mooney has to land enough good ones. maybe he did this year with Smith, Taner, Graham and Tyne. plus Noyes and Walz the year before. we don't know. we haven't seem them much.
there are plenty of reasonably smart kids to recruit. Mooney has to land enough good ones. maybe he did this year with Smith, Taner, Graham and Tyne. plus Noyes and Walz the year before. we don't know. we haven't seem them much.
SFspider, I highly respect everything you do on this board, but from to 1977 to 1985 we were 3-18 against VCU. From 1989 to 2001 they were a low quality team outside of a couple years and we only had a 50% winning percentage over that time. Our all time record is 32-59 and they have taken it up a level since 2006. Over that time their sos has averaged one of the highest in the country for mid-majors. If they keep playing like they have since 2006, we are not going to have a good record against them regardless of who coaches the team.
Last edited:
Are you an apologist for Mooney or a Spider fan? The defeatist attitude you repeatedly display is disappointing to say the least.
Very apparent you are angling for a BOT position. You'd fit right in. Good luck.
8legs1dream
Team Manager
so that's it then, not a sliver of hope that we can "compete" with big brother? If the higher-ups in the program that you are supposedly so close with even slightly share your views then what are we even doing here?!
So what's your suggestion, just keep taking it and continue being embarrassed in our own city? What's your solution?
Its just no wonder that they killed the young Mooney's spirit, with the old heads that just beat this thing down.
Question re academics. Sman, think you are living in the past a little. Do a google search and find out how many players (whether at Yale, Brown, VCU, SDSU ANY p6, A10, CAA) that were ruled academically ineligible the last few years. Every NCAA standard that was in place, I have not heard or seen mentioned in an article in years.
Question re academics. Sman, think you are living in the past a little. Do a google search and find out how many players (whether at Yale, Brown, VCU, SDSU ANY p6, A10, CAA) that were ruled academically ineligible the last few years. Every NCAA standard that was in place, I have not heard or seen mentioned in an article in years.
This is a bit of a weird take. Nearly half of our losses in that all time record are owned by CM. So your position is that should be expected?
Let’s aim a bit higher.
The more I think about this whole NIL thing, the more it brings me back to the question of how schools reconcile the fact that they are basically treating athletes as employees more so than students.
I recognize I’m oversimplifying this a bit but if we can stipulate that these guys are basically being paid to attend, then maybe we can go ahead and abandon the notion that these athletes have to meet some academic standard above the ncaa minimum.
Just spitballing.
I recognize I’m oversimplifying this a bit but if we can stipulate that these guys are basically being paid to attend, then maybe we can go ahead and abandon the notion that these athletes have to meet some academic standard above the ncaa minimum.
Just spitballing.
I would not want to share a foxhole with you.
Villanova is a pretty prestigious academic school. It also has a few national championships in basketball and just took our best player. I wonder how many people in the country are concerned about whether a few of Villanova's players might not have been able to earn admission to the university if they didn't play basketball?
I don’t see what relevance our record during the Carter and Reagan administrations have to do with Chris Mooney.
This is like your kid working at 7/11 and when they ask where he went wrong you say “well he got a C in preschool once and he just could never overcome it”
This is an interesting point. The Mooney that came here in 2006 is clearly not the Mooney we see today.
You do have to wonder reading defeatest drivel like that from UR80's fan (who at least purports to have the ear of some influential people), reading Queally tell fans to "lower their expectations", that Mooney was around this 24/7, not just around it but having to answer to it, you can begin to understand how he fell in line.
You can also see why guys like Danny Rocco, got the hell out of here. Rocco's warning to all of us when he left was very prescient.
It almost seems institutional at this point. And yes, it is very much a Patriot League mindset. Sad, frustrating, pathetic.
Yep, that was my point. I recall the discussion on here how Mooney had become "de-clawed" for lack of better term. Definitely ramped up with a really good roster in the early years, and guys like Geriot/Gonzo/Butler/K Smith etc that had a ride or die mentality. That has been my biggest complaint since, the culture has gone softer, and our identity has become murkier every year. Watching Gilly last night, and for years on the Spiders - he does and did have that attitude. But we seem to have too many guys that are not those "dawgs" and then on the other hand also do not have the skill set to shoot and make the pretty plays.
agreed nobody is ruled academically ineligible. I haven't even heard of a "partial qualifier" in a decade or more. not sure the point you're making. I've said we absolutely have a much lower acceptance threshhold for basketball players as compared to the general population. we haven't heard of anyone denied acceptance since Vassalo or Bernard 10 years or so ago.
Re-reading, probably should not have been aimed at sman. I agree with you here, there does not seem to be any evidence that we are restricted by academics in recruiting any more. Which I know 80s posted that was taken care of several years back. It did not seem to open up the pool to a higher level of recruit.
not sure if I'm "mis-remembering", but feels like we used to have a more targeted recruiting approach where we prioritized one or two guys and we usually landed those high priority guys.
now I feel like we cast a really wide net, and miss on more. Smith and Tanner may have been priority guys. maybe it's different in the portal. think we reached out to about 60 guys there to land 3. then we took our ball and went home despite saying we have a spot remaining.
Right, so we haven't had any academic hindrances for a few years now, according to 80sFan, but also according to 80sFan, we can't be expected to beat VCU because they have lower academic standards. Lower than what, if we don't have any roadblocks to admittance? Which is it?
What type of weed do you smoke, because it must be great stuff to think we not have academic standards for basketball players. They are a lot lower than regular students, but still require pretty good students.
Back to VCU players, a lot of people on the team would fail out if they went to U of R.
Yawn, mr. excuse maker. I think you are in the brandy early buddy.
Not going to touch the academics discussion going on but I will say I feel there have been 3 eras of VCU basketball. Let me know if I am off a game in a few spots.
Era A -End of 1971-end of 1985 VCU winning percentage .715 (15 seasons)
Era B - 1986-2002 .528 17 seasons
Era C -2003-2023 .710 21 seasons
Against them:
Start 5-0 then 1-9
Tarrant against Era A 2-9 against Era B 7-6
Dooley vs Era B 1-6
Beinlein vs Era B 7-3
Wainwright vs Era C 1-2
Mooney vs Era C 8-24 (that seems off one?)
I feel priorities should be consistently beat teams worse than VCU, beat teams better than VCU at a consistent rate (Since Cal, there is Wisconsin & Iowa, who am I missing?) before we worry about a winning record vs VCU, unless they drop back to Era B.
8legs1dream
Team Manager
Elitist BS. This is why people hate UR.
I mean that if coaches go to admissions and say, these are the guys I want to get in, that's an easier path than being in the gen pop pool. Without having to materially adjust for scores or essays or grades.
well yeah. that's how every basketball player gets into every D1 school including the Ivys I believe. then admissions looks at grades and scores and says "good enough".
I don't think we should look at VCU any differently than any other school when it comes to getting guys admitted. If the guys they get are accepted by the NCAA, good for them, they earned the right to play there. It's not like VCU is the exception here. And, I certainly would not talk about how unintelligent their players might be. That is nothing but a cheap shot, especially when some might be a lot smarter than you think. I know one thing....VCU players usually have a good basketball IQ. My hope is we have at least changed enough over the years to allow more guys in. If we don't want to just go out and have 13 guys on the team who barely qualified according to the NCAA, fine, we don't have to go there, but I certainly hope we aren't turning down the occasional Malcolm Bernard types out there. If so, that is an us problem, not a VCU problem.
I will say, that Malcolm Bernard situation screwed Mooney, and was a disaster. I guess PQ did not have the pull or push with admissions.
