Sal updates
- Thread starter Ulla1
- Start date
Ulla,
Thanks for the ongoing updates! Sal looks like a great addition and a sign that our recruiting is significantly more on-target than it was just 3 years ago. This team is not losing games this season due to lack of talent.
We have enough talent that we should be wining most games easily. Why we are not doing so it the mystery of the century for UR. Most posters are pointing to the coaching, which certainly looks reasonable. However, starting with Buck and Nick, and following with Grant, Jacob, Solly and Nate, (and now Sal) we should be winning regularly and looking forward to regular NCAA participation. Why is it not happening so far, and will the ship be turned around by the time Sal is ready to enroll? Fingers crossed, but not holding my breath...
Thanks for the ongoing updates! Sal looks like a great addition and a sign that our recruiting is significantly more on-target than it was just 3 years ago. This team is not losing games this season due to lack of talent.
We have enough talent that we should be wining most games easily. Why we are not doing so it the mystery of the century for UR. Most posters are pointing to the coaching, which certainly looks reasonable. However, starting with Buck and Nick, and following with Grant, Jacob, Solly and Nate, (and now Sal) we should be winning regularly and looking forward to regular NCAA participation. Why is it not happening so far, and will the ship be turned around by the time Sal is ready to enroll? Fingers crossed, but not holding my breath...
We don't have that kind of talent at all. The problem is as much lack of talent as what we are doing with the talent. Both are on CM and we could do better with this talent, but their isn't that much there quite frankly. Buck is a solid talent but not a star. Grant is solid offensively but terrible defensively. On a good team, Nick is at best a role player for his shooting, but he is limited offensively and terrible defensively. Jacob has upside, but right now he is a small guy who certainly belongs out there for this team, but his size is always going to limit him in some ways. Solly and Nate haven't shown any great talent etc. maybe some potential but nothing says they are guys who should be regular NCAA participants as you put it. Moon mans coaching is a problem, but those guys aren't that good either. We are 3-12 and to be in discussion as NCAA team with our schedule, we'd need to be at least 12-3. John wooden wouldn't sniff 12-3 with this group and their limitations as players. Mooney brought them all here and didn't bring better so it's all on him, but the problem is recruiting first, teaching 2nd and actual X's and O's down the list.
Fortunately, or unfortunately depending on your point of view, we're going to win a lot more games next year barring any unexpected personnel losses.
I agree with a lot of what you said, but mostly disagree with your opening sentence. We have a lot of talent, but its young talent. The problem is past recruiting misses and no upperclassmen and that's on Mooney
Define a lot more? We could double our win total and still be lousy next year. And last time, I checked, we will have the same personnel and coach as this year, so why would be so much better. Sal looks good but he isn't some savior recruit we have coming in here.
Well it won't be hard to win more than 6 or 7, but I also wouldn't be so sure about that. Most of the guys playing minutes for us this year have been in the program at least 18 months. They're not just suddenly going to figure everything out next year because they're older. The team actually has to get better, not just older, and largely under Mooney our players mostly just get older.
I'm glad I fired up some of you Mooney haters!! Same personnel plus another year expand at least one talented freshman can do wonders. And I think it will.
I'll define "a lot more games as NCAA competitive. The questions is... Is that enough to keep him even if you believe that (as I do). If you don't believe that we'll be NCAA competitive then of course you believe he should be fired. But I'd like some answers to my question... "if you could believe that UR would be NCAA competitive next year with Mooney, would you still want him gone?"
Yes. If this bunch plus new guy is that competitive under Mooney, they might go to the final four under a real coach.
If it means we only average one NCAA visit every 4.66 years then yes, I’d still vote for a new direction even if we were “competitive” next year. Herein is where hope overrules logic and why so many have been willing to stick with CM.
I don't see a team that will probably finish last in the A-10 this year suddenly being NCAA competitive next year with the same personnel and same coach. Mooney has had much more talented teams than what he has now and still has not made us NCAA competitive in those years.
Yes, I have arrived at the point at which I want him gone, period. Nothing can change my mind on that, because I realize that even if we catch lightning in a bottle and get to the tournament and even win a game, it will most likely be the result of an exceptional couple of players -- as with KA and Harp -- and not because of the coach.
I seem to recall that Sal played a bunch of games the first two weeks of January, and a few of these were nice wins. Does anyone (Ulla?) have updates they can post, or video?
Sal's team's Iona Prep last played on Saturday, January 13 in which they won. Sal scored 24 pts in that game. Here is the link to that game. The next play today. If you are unable to view, just subscribe - it is free!
http://www.maxpreps.com/games/baske...qLV6t8kWgaWGXfTkoaw.htm#tab=matchup&schoolid=
http://www.maxpreps.com/games/baske...qLV6t8kWgaWGXfTkoaw.htm#tab=matchup&schoolid=
Define NCAA competitive, don't make the NCAA but in the NIT? In consideration for and at large but don't get in? first out? what? In a strict interpretation, right now we are NCAA competitive because that is the level we play, and won a couple of games.
And frankly this plan of loading up some years with freshmen, only leaves us with another start over every 4 years. We have 8 freshmen, so what is Mooney doing taking as many as he can hoping that one of them will turn him into a NCAA tourney team coach? Is he going to run 4 of them off what?
Didn't realize Sal was offered at some quality schools. Now hoping this 3 star recruit with some size will start next season. JG has looked good enough so far at the point, that having KF as the 6th man seems the logical move.
Sal's recent 24-point performance is more good news. This recruit was in demand and with good reason. Looks like he is close to doubling his junior year numbers. That, coupled with his impressive wingspan, suggests he may be our third freshman in three seasons to have a shot at the all-rookie A-10 team.
In my book with our ROY last year (Buck) and our two likely "all-rookie team" selections this season (Grant and Jake), followed by a guy who should have a shot at all-rookie next year (Sal), would not imply any recruiting deficits. If Sal makes the all-rookie team next season, we will have 4 that made it in 3 seasons.
Unless we expect to average more than one all-rookie player per year, it would appear that our recruiting has been more than satisfactory. Sal has not made the all-rookie team yet, but if Grant and Jake make it this season we will have three in the past two years, which is very good if we can continue to develop the players we have.
In my book with our ROY last year (Buck) and our two likely "all-rookie team" selections this season (Grant and Jake), followed by a guy who should have a shot at all-rookie next year (Sal), would not imply any recruiting deficits. If Sal makes the all-rookie team next season, we will have 4 that made it in 3 seasons.
Unless we expect to average more than one all-rookie player per year, it would appear that our recruiting has been more than satisfactory. Sal has not made the all-rookie team yet, but if Grant and Jake make it this season we will have three in the past two years, which is very good if we can continue to develop the players we have.
It takes us 15.games every year to figure out rotations.
Can't figure out why especially since guys red shirt.
Can't figure out why especially since guys red shirt.
Here we go again, crowning players impact makers before they even get here. Also, Mooney has 5 other recruits in this year's class. If you put them in context, even if those 4 guys all pan out to be difference makers, his hit rate on recruiting is still less than 50%. Which is on par for what he has done the past 5-6 years.
It is fine to have blind faith in Mooney when it comes to recruiting but at this point it is almost ignorance to have faith in his ability to solidly recruit a full roster.
Sorry, Oldie, but I'm doubting that the A-10 is going to include two players from a bottom-tier team on the All-Rookie team, given the strong crop of first-year players. Goodwin and French from SLU, Funk from SJU, Russell from URI, Williams from Duquesne, Grady from Davidson, Mar from GMU, all have a legit claim on the 5 spots. I would bet that we get one, but not two, and think Gilyard may be out of luck.
Being on a bad team often helps prospective All-Rookie players, it gives them a chance to get a lot of volume stats which is what most of the voters look at.
Are you saying...(be still my heart)...that maybe...we might.....possibly.....get...
TO HANG A TWO-GUYS-ON-THE-ALL-A10-ROOKIE-TEAM BANNER???!!!
TO HANG A TWO-GUYS-ON-THE-ALL-A10-ROOKIE-TEAM BANNER???!!!
Well we have to hang some sort of banner and it certainly isn't going to be a kenpom top 100!
You won't get an argument from me on how special a player I think Gilyard already is. I'd put him on the team--just saying that it isn't the foregone conclusion that Oldie would wish it to be, and for better or worse voters usually look at PPG first, second, and last.
As recently as last year Duquesne, who finished in 14th place in the A10 standings, placed two players on the all rookie team. I'm not saying we will this year, as the competition seems much more fierce than usual this year.
Of course I see your point, but for me just hoping Sal being a 3 star player turns out to be exactly that from day 1. With the lack of talent past the starters +JJ, Sal could easily be a starter if he has the IT FACTOR.
No matter what your resources are, a 43% win rate in the CAA is not good. I would be extremely disappointed and very confused if we hired a coach with that type of resume, especially one well into his 60s. I cannot imagine why some of you want to replace Mooney with a coach who actually has a losing record at their current job. There is a reason Shaver is still at W+M after 15 years.
Edit: I may have posted this in the wrong thread?
Edit: I may have posted this in the wrong thread?
Last edited:
Similar threads
