Strange stats

[ChoppinBroccoli]

So, Hardt's one statement trumpeting the MBB program is for something that happened 8-10 years ago. My god, we are digging deep to find one nugget of good news to put in his AD update.

I can't wait for his next letter when he talks about going to 2 straights NCAA and a Sweet 16. I'm sure he can just put it the fine print that this really happened 2010-2011. I doubt anyone will notice.

In defense of Hardt, the NCAA GSR report came out this November, and he trumpeted the entire athletic department. I have no idea why the NCAA can't publish these numbers sooner after the rolling period ends - they have all the data for the first three years, and most of it for the fourth (the subset of athletes on a "six year plan" should be relatively small). I don't have a problem with him congratulating our student-athletes and programs for it, but it's telling that it's the only time he mentions basketball aside from the practice facility.

Someone who doesn't "look it up" could easily assume these statistics are applicable to recent teams. To put into football context, this report - released November 2018 - would only include young men recruited by Mike London and Latrell Scott.

 

[VT4700]

The numbers are for athletes entering from 2008-2011. They give you 6 years from when you enter, so that is why the numbers could not be released sooner. They do this annually, and next year, we will see numbers from athletes entering from 2009-2012.

 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

The numbers are for athletes entering from 2008-2011. They give you 6 years from when you enter, so that is why the numbers could not be released sooner. They do this annually, and next year, we will see numbers from athletes entering from 2009-2012.

I understand how it works. Six academic years from a 2011 entry would be Spring of 2017; 6 full calendar years Fall of 2017. It's late fall of 2018. The subset of students that need the full 6 years should be pretty small, and they'd already have all the data from 2008-2010, and 90+% of 2011. It's still taking them over a year to release the report.

My point was, most of the reading audience probably isn't aware the data is that old.

 

[urfan1]

because it takes so long to come out I find it of little value. Like we are looking at London and Scott's players. If the numbers are bad -- they have been gone how long?

 

[SouthJerseySpiderFan]

We did it! After Gonzaga's loss today we are now #1 in the country in 2FG%.

And right now UR is ranked #6 And as you could look up, ODU is ranked #2 nationally for defensive 2FG%. Something has to give.

 

[wr70beh]

The only 2 stats that matter to me this year are our record at 4-6, and ranked 344 out of 353 in strength of schedule to obtain that stellar record.

Last year we had the 34th toughest schedule in non- conference and were 2-10. Looks like we had to put out a crap schedule in order to get 3, maybe 4 extra wins OOC. How is this acceptable? Heads must roll.

 

[Eight Legger]

Yep. If we played the same schedule we played last year, there's a pretty good chance we would be 0-10 right now.

 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

Yep. If we played the same schedule we played last year, there's a pretty good chance we would be 0-10 right now.

We lost to Wake Forest last year, and beat them this year.

 

[urmite]

We did it! After Gonzaga's loss today we are now #1 in the country in 2FG%. Still in last place for offensive rebounding percentage though.

2FG% could be an interesting stat in the next game...