Here's a hint from a guy who works in an athletic department: Referring to employees at a level under the AD as "underlings," which many (me included) see as an insult, isn't a great way to start a letter if you hope to be taken seriously.
Proposed Letter to Keith Gill
- Thread starter iSpider
- Start date
While being in a position to be in the NIT so often was an accomplishment and the NIT had more prestige then than it does now...The NCAA had 64 teams by 1985, and the NIT has stayed at 32 but now not all are at large (20 at-larges last year)...so it may be less total invites available to our conference now vs then.
Ironic that we moved to the A10 in large part to claim more at-large bids, but we had more overall bids in the 15 years prior to the move than in the 15 years since. And by ironic I mean depressing.
Actually that is something to look at, 17 years in the CAA 1 at-large but 5 tourney title, 14 years (plus this year) in the A-10 2 at-larges but only 1 tourney title.
True but the a10 secures more bids every year than the caa. We just haven't been good enough during our tenure to earn them, although two of them have come during our a10 run which is more at large bids than prior to joining the a10.
Irony is a heartless b*t(h.
Irony is a heartless b*t(h.
Very true, especially since the A-10 lost most of its headline teams, (Temple, Xavier, Butler) and effectively became the CAA2.
According to the Conference RPI, the A-10 is now the 7th strongest conference. The CAA AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW is 9th, which surprises the Hell out of me since they only have 10 so-so teams in there. They're having a pretty good year, while the A-10 is kind of in flux. Oddly enough, the A-10 went 4-6 vs. the CAA this season. Of course, our only CAA opponent embarrassed us on opening night.
That doesn't say much for the A-10. As I have said all along, it is a very weak league this year. 3 one and done tournament teams at best.
Maybe, but three bids is a respectable showing for any non-P5 conference. I think Dayton is good enough to win a couple of games.
Last year was the first in a long time that the A10 didn't have a team in the sweet 16. The A10 has averaged 3 NCAA wins a year since the exodus. Temple hasn't been back to the NCAAs since they left the A10, and even when they were here they won the same number of NCAA games as Richmond. Charlotte hasn't been to the NCAAs in over a decade. Dayton has won more NCAA games than Xavier since Xavier left. Butler was only part of the A10 for one year, and their fans were the worst I have ever interacted with, including VCU. They have won 1 NCAA game since their departure.
The new Big East has averaged 5 bids a year since their formation, the A10 has averaged 4.5. We might actually get more bids than them this year.
There's nothing wrong with the A10. It's certainly not the reason that we are failing to make the NCAAs every year. If we were in the Big East this year, our record would be even worse than what it is now, so that move would not help unless we started recruiting better.
And yes, the Big East will get more bids than the A10 this year, no doubt. I also think that most years, the top 4 or 5 in both leagues will be relatively similar teams.
And yes, the Big East will get more bids than the A10 this year, no doubt. I also think that most years, the top 4 or 5 in both leagues will be relatively similar teams.
Excuse me Eight, that is simply not true. The Big East typically has 3 to 5 teams ranked in the top 25 and one or more ranked in the top 10. The A10 is lucky to have a single team ranked in the top 25 and nearly never has a team in the top 10. OSC
This is a very good year for the Big East, mostly because X has its best team ever and Villanova is very good. Last year was not such a good year for that league. My point is that there is not significant difference in talent and ability among our top 4 teams and theirs. It would be reasonable to assume the leagues would split those 4 games, were they played, depending upon the matchups.
By way on private board KWeaver his KG response letter and it is the exact same
one that I received. Those saved response documents sure come in handy. Wonder
how long ago it was created?
one that I received. Those saved response documents sure come in handy. Wonder
how long ago it was created?
Since you asked for our opinions, here you go:
I agree with the earlier comment about saying "underlings". No reason for it, and saying "save yourself or your underling the energy of a response and just pay attention to my message" in the first paragraph immediately sets a bad, arrogant tone, and could very well be the last part of the letter he reads.
Paragraph 2 and 3 seem fine, although I would call a basketball team an embarrassment when they are having issues off the court, playing with a lack of class on the court, or consistently near the bottom of the standings on the court. We have good kids, who care and play hard, and represent the university with class, but as a team, we just are not very good this year. Frustrating and disappointing, yes, but in my opinion, our team is not embarrassing.
Paragraph 4: I doubt he cares about the opinions of 99% of alumni on a message board since numerous message boards, even from big time winning programs, are consistently full of negative energy. And, for this board, how many people are you really talking about anyway? 10? 15? So, maybe word this a different way and leave out the message board talk.
Paragraph 5: I would suggest changing "My advice" to "My hope is that you". It is better if the letter sounds like you are making suggestions, not giving advice.
Paragraph 6: If I were an AD reading this letter, I would have trashed it awhile ago, but if he somehow has read to this point, saying "we are no longer willing to tolerate your...ignorance" should be more than enough for him to say "enough is enough". Ignorance? Really?
Paragraph 7: Do you really see nothing wrong with saying "no one has any faith in what you say when it comes to the basketball program".
Paragraphs 8-12: He does not need to hear you say "we surely can remove you", and telling him to "take action or look for other work" is beyond ridiculous. Same with ending with "do something or move on"
Overall, I would say this letter sounds like just another letter from a frustrated message board person, and if I were an AD reading it, it would mean nothing to me and I would not think twice about it.
I agree with the earlier comment about saying "underlings". No reason for it, and saying "save yourself or your underling the energy of a response and just pay attention to my message" in the first paragraph immediately sets a bad, arrogant tone, and could very well be the last part of the letter he reads.
Paragraph 2 and 3 seem fine, although I would call a basketball team an embarrassment when they are having issues off the court, playing with a lack of class on the court, or consistently near the bottom of the standings on the court. We have good kids, who care and play hard, and represent the university with class, but as a team, we just are not very good this year. Frustrating and disappointing, yes, but in my opinion, our team is not embarrassing.
Paragraph 4: I doubt he cares about the opinions of 99% of alumni on a message board since numerous message boards, even from big time winning programs, are consistently full of negative energy. And, for this board, how many people are you really talking about anyway? 10? 15? So, maybe word this a different way and leave out the message board talk.
Paragraph 5: I would suggest changing "My advice" to "My hope is that you". It is better if the letter sounds like you are making suggestions, not giving advice.
Paragraph 6: If I were an AD reading this letter, I would have trashed it awhile ago, but if he somehow has read to this point, saying "we are no longer willing to tolerate your...ignorance" should be more than enough for him to say "enough is enough". Ignorance? Really?
Paragraph 7: Do you really see nothing wrong with saying "no one has any faith in what you say when it comes to the basketball program".
Paragraphs 8-12: He does not need to hear you say "we surely can remove you", and telling him to "take action or look for other work" is beyond ridiculous. Same with ending with "do something or move on"
Overall, I would say this letter sounds like just another letter from a frustrated message board person, and if I were an AD reading it, it would mean nothing to me and I would not think twice about it.
Eight, case in point. Dayton, the best of the A10, was beaten 90-61 by Xavier. That's 29 points and Xavier is not even the best team in the Big East. I would say if you want to compare that the top teams in the A10 are more similar to the bottom of the Big East, save for Depaul. Just my humble opinion. OSC
That was game. I'm not drawing any conclusions from one game. Dayton has a ton of top-50 wins and is an excellent team.
But let's assume you are correct and the Big East is light years ahead of the A10. What makes you think we would want to be in that league? We are 6-8 right now in a league you consider to be garbage. What would our record be in the Big East right now? 2-12? Worse?
But let's assume you are correct and the Big East is light years ahead of the A10. What makes you think we would want to be in that league? We are 6-8 right now in a league you consider to be garbage. What would our record be in the Big East right now? 2-12? Worse?
Since so much of this board has gotten over the top, I'll say it. Ulla does not care what our record would be. He is interested in the prestige of playing better teams and institutions, win or lose.
And to carry on the hyperbole, the A-10 is the new CAA and the Big East is the old CAA.
would suggest, not looking at numbers, that the big east has a much, much, better, perception, reputation, vibe than our league.
clearly the big east has a better reputation and perception, it's built upon years of big time programs having championship level success. a10 hasn't had that, so of course big east looks sexy.
i think Eight has a good point though, which is we would probably get our lunch eaten right now in the BE.
i think Eight has a good point though, which is we would probably get our lunch eaten right now in the BE.
The A-10 is a great league but I think everyone knows that we would jump at the chance to go to the Big East. However, whenever the Big East expands we better have something to hang our hats other than a couple NCAA bids in 2010 and 2011. Why would the Big East want a team that consistently finishes in the middle of the pack of the A-10 and who seemingly is pretty content with that?
BTW, Villanova is a pretty darn good academic university and they don't seem to have a problem recruiting top level talent to play there. Our consistent excuse of " oh UR is too academic rigorous to get good players" will probably fall on deaf ears. They want programs who can win and increase the stature of the Big East, we don't meet that criteria at present.
BTW, Villanova is a pretty darn good academic university and they don't seem to have a problem recruiting top level talent to play there. Our consistent excuse of " oh UR is too academic rigorous to get good players" will probably fall on deaf ears. They want programs who can win and increase the stature of the Big East, we don't meet that criteria at present.
I can't imagine that our profile looks that good for any kind of BE expansion. To 97's point, we need to get our house in order in the A10 first. Frankly, if we perform well/consistently in the A10, I don't care about being in the BE, I just want to be somewhere we have good opportunities to make the NCAA which the A10 does afford us.
I like the a10. Its a great conference for us. And at-large bids are possible out of this conference. We just haven't been consistently good enough to be in a position to get them.
Lunardi currently has the A10 with 3 in the field and 2 in the first 4 out, so there actually is a very slim chance of getting 5 at larges and a dark horse auto-bid for 6 total bids.
The Big East is currently projected to get 5 in, but 2 of those 5 are in the last 8 in and they could easily end up with 3 bids.
I am curious as to why anyone thinks the Big East is going to expand anymore? Is this still even really a topic?
To wit, Seton Hall is third in the Big East, and the fifth-place team in the A-10 (GW) beat them 72-64 this year. The fifth-place team in the Big East, Providence, only beat Rhode Island, the seventh-place team in the A-10, by 2 points this year.
The seventh-place team in the Big East, Georgetown, lost at home to Monmouth, UNC-Asheville and Radford this year.
The Big East is being strongly buoyed at this point by its top two teams, Villanova and Xavier, who are having exceptional seasons. I'm not saying that I would be upset if we joined the Big East, but on balance I'll match our top 10 teams against its 10 teams anytime.
Back to the original topic (I think). After the season I do hope to either talk with Keith face to face or if that doesn't work out, converse through email.
I would keep it simple and not to assign blame. I would start by letting him know that I am aware of our successes with our other sports and that my concerns are with our basketball program.
To start I would let him know that over the last 5 years my personal investment in the basketball program has increased on a fairly regular basis but the product ROI has steadily decreased. If he were to be in my place how would that affect his decision on putting more into his investment?
Would he not want some correspondence from the administration explaining what is being done to correct the decline in value? Would he expect new investors (donors and fans) to put their hard earned cash into a venture that ,at least on the surface, appears to be in trouble.
So the bottom line is don't you (Keith) think the school owes it to our donors, fans and recruits to make a statement about the state of our basketball program including what the goals are and what steps are being put in place to reach those goals. And finally I think the statement should come from Dr. Crutcher and Keith Gill.
I know I'm just one person and as someone stated on this or another thread, there are only 20 - 30 regular posters on here. But between me, my kids, my other family members I can account for 10 season tickets. Then add friends and classmates that don't live in the area and I can account for 20 more grads and fans at least. So I can account for 30+ and this board probably could do the same and more. Now we are talking about a pretty sizable grass roots campaign if it comes to that down the road. So Roll Spid!
I would keep it simple and not to assign blame. I would start by letting him know that I am aware of our successes with our other sports and that my concerns are with our basketball program.
To start I would let him know that over the last 5 years my personal investment in the basketball program has increased on a fairly regular basis but the product ROI has steadily decreased. If he were to be in my place how would that affect his decision on putting more into his investment?
Would he not want some correspondence from the administration explaining what is being done to correct the decline in value? Would he expect new investors (donors and fans) to put their hard earned cash into a venture that ,at least on the surface, appears to be in trouble.
So the bottom line is don't you (Keith) think the school owes it to our donors, fans and recruits to make a statement about the state of our basketball program including what the goals are and what steps are being put in place to reach those goals. And finally I think the statement should come from Dr. Crutcher and Keith Gill.
I know I'm just one person and as someone stated on this or another thread, there are only 20 - 30 regular posters on here. But between me, my kids, my other family members I can account for 10 season tickets. Then add friends and classmates that don't live in the area and I can account for 20 more grads and fans at least. So I can account for 30+ and this board probably could do the same and more. Now we are talking about a pretty sizable grass roots campaign if it comes to that down the road. So Roll Spid!
Concerning the Big East, I would only want to see us move to a"better" league only if we have been dominating the one we are currently in. Right now we are a medium fish in a medium size pond. Why in the world would we want to be a small fish in a bigger pond?
You would say the same if not harsher face to face & would put Mooney & Gill on a short leash personally? I don't know what else to attribute that to except Internet tough guy syndrome. Congrats you won and it's only Monday. This reply is up there with your draft letter.
Sorry I didn't realize my moniker bred anything. Moniker I've had on Spiderfans message board since the late 90's. I guess your moniker breeds an over reliance on technology. Which means data over intuition. Which means you are actually Bill Cooper! Hi Bill. How is Naples? Hope you make it up to Captiva Island this winter.
So it would seem the only way the A-10 gets 5 is at the expense of the Big East. The committee will pick the Big East over the A-10 every day of the week, only because of past history (80's - G'Town/Villanova, etc.). If the A-10 had some championships recently, and not rely on Final 4/championships from other conferences or ancient history (St. Bona Final Four 1970, La Salle's championship in 1954) we could have a leg to stand on.
Not really, our bids don't really have anything to do with the Big East's bids. The Big East is currently at 4 bids with 2 in the last 8 in, 0 in the first 4 out. A10 is currently at 3 bids with 0 in the last 8 in and 2 in the first 4 out. So the A10 has 3 safe teams and the Big East has 2. Butler and Seton Hall losing would help us get more teams in, but it isn't necessary. There are tons of other bubble teams that could lose and move our teams into the field, the real key is for GW and St. Bonaventure (our bubble teams) to keep winning. However if we beat GW tomorrow, which I expect will happen, they will be knocked out of the field so I am rooting for 4 at larges.
I will agree that the A10 has some poor programs that give nothing in Fordham, Dukes, LaSalle(except of course their great run), RI, mason, umass, st.louis, ... Wow that really is a sad group.
In just the past 8 years that group includes a final 4 team, a sweet 16 team, and at least two other teams that were ranked in the top 25. A sad group indeed.
This is true. In the what have you done for me lately world we live in, all these teams, plus UR, are not very good. But we have had recent success. Though at UR recent is relative.
So your argument is that the A10 sucks because it doesn't deserve many bids, and it doesn't deserve many bids because some the best teams are losing to a bad team that has a sub-100 RPI, and therefore the team with the sub-100 RPI (us) is too good for this crappy league and should go to a better league? Got it.
Similar threads
