Which tournament will we play in?
- Thread starter PASpider
- Start date
Next three games are critical. We have to beat Davidson at home and find a way to steal one from GW or Bonnie. Look, we gave the game up yesterday to RPI. We did everything necessary at the end of regulation and in OT to not close the game out. That being said, we were right there and should have won the game. We have the talent to get on a roll of we can tighten up the D a little and make free throws.
Going to be honest and say that Marshall should start. Get his offense going then bring in Deion as the defensive stopper. Defense "travels" much better than offense. OSC
But we all know Deion will start as long as he is healthy. Loyalty to a fault. What else is new? This team desperately needs a 6- or 7-game winning streak, but I can't remember the last time under Mooney that we did that with a team that didn't include KA. I don't feel like going through the record book to check, but I have a feeling I'm right here. At this point, 11-7 would be a pretty good finish for us, but certainly not enough to get us in the tournament. And meanwhile, VCU, with its worst team in years, is already 3 games ahead of us in the league, while we have a senior-dominated roster and are 2-3. Just freaking awesome. Way to go, coach.
Sure, this may be overly optimistic but I still see a scenario where we make the big dance. Still have A10 forerunners Davidson (x2), Bonnies, VCU, GW, and Dayton. Win five of those plus a nice run in the A10 tourney and we'll find ourselves right on the bubble.
Crazier things have happened
Crazier things have happened
Don't make me dig up the list of coaches in top-8 leagues who have missed the NCAAs five years in a row at their current jobs...
We SHOULD beat Davidson both times – they're worse than we are on defense, and they have no chance of making the tournament at this point. Their RPI is ridiculously artificially inflated. They have one decent win and a bunch of blowout losses to very good teams. Beating them twice won't do much at all for our tournament hopes. Neither win will go up as a "good win" come selection time.
Certainly splitting with GW and VCU, beating Dayton at home and Bona on the road would improve our chances big time.
You thinking we need to finish out 11-2 to get in NCAA. Maybe couple more wins in A-10 tourney? A-10 Tourney is winnable too. There are no Butlers, Temples or Xavier's to beat. Everyone else is about even on a neutral floor.
Winning the A-10 tournament is the only likely path now. The lack of dominant teams, parity, and the neutral court does make this a possibility for any team that gets on a roll at the right time.
Come on..... Programs and coaches who have moved up in conference or job. Do you really care if we change coaches but get into the NCAA every two to three years? Plus who is paid what Mooney is paid, who has a facility that Mooney has?
I think you're missing my point, which is that there are hardly any coaches in top-8 leagues who miss the NCAAs five straight years and keep their jobs. Mooney is in "elite" company in that regard.
Winning four in a row in NYC with a 6-7 man rotation will be a tough assignment. We've started 2-3 in conference (dropping 2 at home), so unless we go on a huge run, a top 4 finish and bye is going to be tough.
As for our NCAA hopes, we still have 13 games left and if we go 10-3 and win a game in the A-10 tourney, we are probably on the right side of things come selection time. The three losses we could "afford" in theory would be among those at Bona, at GW, at VCU, at Davidson, home to Dayton. But at the same time, we need to win a couple of those games to get some good wins.
Beat Dayton at home and GW and VCU on the road and we are looking good. Lose all 4 road games and win everything else, and I fear we would not have enough "good" wins to be in the mix.
Beat Dayton at home and GW and VCU on the road and we are looking good. Lose all 4 road games and win everything else, and I fear we would not have enough "good" wins to be in the mix.
I am with you, and I think we can win any of those games individually, but collectively?? It will be tough. Take them one at a time I guess, enjoy watching them play, stay on Mooney's a$$ and see what we get.
Why does anyone think this team is going to finish the year 10-3?
My prediction is 8-5. We lose at St. Bonnie, GW, VCU and at home against GW and Dayton. Maybe we steal one of those 2 home games, but feel we make that up by losing at Mason or Duquense, if that happens.
18-12 for the year, I think is a solid NIT team, maybe we even get a home game or two. If I'm wrong come back and rub it my face come March, I'll be happy to take it.
My prediction is 8-5. We lose at St. Bonnie, GW, VCU and at home against GW and Dayton. Maybe we steal one of those 2 home games, but feel we make that up by losing at Mason or Duquense, if that happens.
18-12 for the year, I think is a solid NIT team, maybe we even get a home game or two. If I'm wrong come back and rub it my face come March, I'll be happy to take it.
We were just guessing what the team would need to do to get to post season. 8-5 is probably more realistic as far as what they will actually do.
Got that right, K. A10 = the new CAA!
Feel free to win in the new CAA to prove you should be able to move to the Big East as you keep posting about it.
This league produced 6 bids after losing Butler and Xavier to the BE. It's pretty good.
I really think 19-13 makes the NIT. Power conferences (which we are not in) make it with 16 or 17 wins. Could be wrong.
No, of course not. I meant it in a negative sense, as in "There are hardly any coaches who fit in this category other than Mooney." It's not a good thing. That's the point. Most schools in these leagues get rid of their coaches if they haven't made the tourney in 5 straight years.
Ok, dammit, I got sucked in and looked it up. Here is the list of coaches in the top-8 leagues (ACC, American, A10, Big 10, Big 12, Big East, SEC, Pac 12) who are in at least their fifth season at their current schools and have not made the NCAAs during that time. There are 100 teams in those 8 conferences and there are 9 coaches who fit this criteria. I'm organizing them by longest tenure at their current schools:
• Lorenzo Romar, Washington, 14th year, last made NCAAs in 2011, two NITs since then
• Chris Mooney, Richmond, 11th year, last made NCAAs 2011, one NIT since then
• Ed Conroy, Tulane, sixth year, no NCAAs, no NITs
• Jeff Lebo, sixth year at ECU, no NCAAs, no NITs (they were coming off 14 straight losing seasons when he was hired)
• Kevin Willard, Seton Hall, sixth year, no NCAAs, one NIT
• Donnie Jones, UCF, sixth year, no NCAAs, one NIT
• Brad Brownell, Clemson, sixth year, last made NCAAs in 2011, one NIT since then
• Pat Chambers, Penn State, fifth year, no NCAAs, no NITs
• Billy Kennedy, Texas A&M, fifth year, no NCAAs, one NIT
• Lorenzo Romar, Washington, 14th year, last made NCAAs in 2011, two NITs since then
• Chris Mooney, Richmond, 11th year, last made NCAAs 2011, one NIT since then
• Ed Conroy, Tulane, sixth year, no NCAAs, no NITs
• Jeff Lebo, sixth year at ECU, no NCAAs, no NITs (they were coming off 14 straight losing seasons when he was hired)
• Kevin Willard, Seton Hall, sixth year, no NCAAs, one NIT
• Donnie Jones, UCF, sixth year, no NCAAs, one NIT
• Brad Brownell, Clemson, sixth year, last made NCAAs in 2011, one NIT since then
• Pat Chambers, Penn State, fifth year, no NCAAs, no NITs
• Billy Kennedy, Texas A&M, fifth year, no NCAAs, one NIT
I think we probably still win 8-9 games in the conference. That will be good enough for about 6-7th place in the league and most likely an NIT bid with a lower seed.
We will not fire Mooney, remember - not only when firing Mooney do you have to pay his hefty contract out, but you also have to have someone in mind for the job. And I can't really think of a hot and upcoming coach right now in the ranks (hot mid major coach) that is out there for us to offer.
We will not fire Mooney, remember - not only when firing Mooney do you have to pay his hefty contract out, but you also have to have someone in mind for the job. And I can't really think of a hot and upcoming coach right now in the ranks (hot mid major coach) that is out there for us to offer.
and you likely re-open the recruitment of three very good incoming freshmen.
i still saying firing a coach isn't the answer unless you're a real bottom dweller or for some other compelling reason. i do think that CM needs to augment what he's doing somehow, I don't think we're getting more from less and just winding up short, we're doing some sub-par things and need to be at par which would make a huge difference in the final outcome.
i still saying firing a coach isn't the answer unless you're a real bottom dweller or for some other compelling reason. i do think that CM needs to augment what he's doing somehow, I don't think we're getting more from less and just winding up short, we're doing some sub-par things and need to be at par which would make a huge difference in the final outcome.
It's a game of inches. If one thing happened differently – just one, of many – against St. Joe's and VCU, we are 4-1 right now instead of 2-3. you could argue that it was just random chance, bad luck or whatever that caused all of those things to go against us, but good teams find ways to win instead of finding ways to lose. When it happens repeatedly over a period of years, you start to wonder.
I do think the recruiting class that is coming in next year has bought Mooney more time. Not like he was going to be fired anyway, but he had his best success with his best players. So hopefully these guys will be so good that they overcome whatever deficiencies we have from a strategy perspective.
At the same time, there are very few long-term coaches I can think of who had success, then went through a long period without a lot of it, then improve to have great success again at the same place. Martelli is similar in a sense, and he is on an upswing again in recent years, after a lot of lean years.
I do think the recruiting class that is coming in next year has bought Mooney more time. Not like he was going to be fired anyway, but he had his best success with his best players. So hopefully these guys will be so good that they overcome whatever deficiencies we have from a strategy perspective.
At the same time, there are very few long-term coaches I can think of who had success, then went through a long period without a lot of it, then improve to have great success again at the same place. Martelli is similar in a sense, and he is on an upswing again in recent years, after a lot of lean years.
I agree with this post and share everyone's frustration. There's more to like about Mooney than not. Do you think he will augment what he's currently doing? When? How? Like all of you, I hate to lose and especially games that could easily be won. Is he so set in his ways that he will never change how he does things and the system he runs? The answer to that question would clear things up for me. Change was difficult for me early in my career but once I embraced the possibilities of what change could bring, things took off. He's basically had one HC job and no pressure to change. Maybe it's time for Gill to discuss the possibilities if things don't change.
I mean, we're 11 years in now, so I feel like we already know the answer to this one.
What has been most needed, IMO and in that of other posters, has been a veteran assistant coach (ideally with previous head coaching experience somewhere) with no ties to Mooney or our program who could come in and provide different perspective on some things, and who brings unique talents that can help our players develop.
Instead, whenever there is a coaching opening, it goes to a former Mooney player or assistant. I don't think you can improve or grow with that type of succession plan. It introduces nothing new to the equation.
I think no tournament because of not using bench and continue start Taylor not Wood.. I think not shake the hsnd means more than fans think. Not just that game only but thinking of Coach now. He is very much wondering now about all things but hebis very much principle no matter what else is hapoens. This is not always good i think
To be fair, CM has definitely evolved during his tenure here. Probably way too slowly for our fanbase, but let's think about all of the things that have improved:
1. Talent level of recruits went from system players to talented guys who could play his system
2. Lots of improvement in how he dealt with players and his general demeanor
3. Vast changes/improvement in terms of game style, flow, pace
4. Less dependence on being a purely 3-ball based team to one that scores in a variety of ways
So I don't think he's immovable. Maybe glacial at times, but not immovable.
1. Talent level of recruits went from system players to talented guys who could play his system
2. Lots of improvement in how he dealt with players and his general demeanor
3. Vast changes/improvement in terms of game style, flow, pace
4. Less dependence on being a purely 3-ball based team to one that scores in a variety of ways
So I don't think he's immovable. Maybe glacial at times, but not immovable.
Similar threads
