Has there ever been a more overvalued Conference(Big east '09)?

#101
#101
BigPapaVol said:
which team. who's better? I'll give you that Marquette is overvalued. G'town is overvalued, but still damn good. Louisville is undervalued. As is UConn.
Click to expand...

Ya, I'd add a really suspect syracuse team; a defenseless irish; and i think we have it covered then. That leaves west va(who i actually think is undervalued), uconn, pitt and louisville. A good top 4, definitely, but not nearly in step with the amount of pub that conference is receiving.

The mind reels at what wv could do if--more likely: when_- ruoff gets consistent.
 
#102
#102
lidderer said:
Ya, I'd add a really suspect syracuse team; a defenseless irish; and i think we have it covered then. That leaves west va(who i actually think is undervalued), uconn, pitt and louisville. A good top 4, definitely, but not nearly in step with the amount of pub that conference is receiving.

The mind reels at what wv could do if--more likely: when_- ruoff gets consistent.
Click to expand...
Syracuse is definitely one of the top 16 teams in the country. The Irish, not so much.
 
#103
#103
lidderer said:
Ya, I'd add a really suspect syracuse team; a defenseless irish; and i think we have it covered then. That leaves west va(who i actually think is undervalued), uconn, pitt and louisville. A good top 4, definitely, but not nearly in step with the amount of pub that conference is receiving.

The mind reels at what wv could do if--more likely: when_- ruoff gets consistent.
Click to expand...
Everyone keeps forgetting Villanova. I'm pretty sure they've made the Sweet 16 3 out of the last 4 years.
 
#106
#106
droski said:
i'd say he's been pretty darn accurate over the years.
Click to expand...

Ya he has been...an hour before. Hence the problem. Point is though: him overvaluing them is the exact case i'm making, people like him. Even if he was good at predicting seeds, that doesnt translate into being an arbiter of quality in any objective sense.
 
#108
#108
BigPapaVol said:
my bad. Villanova can play and I like West Philly.
Click to expand...
It amazes me that a guy can do as good a job in a major market as Jay Wright and get so little publicity. Little known fact: Wright was Grunfeld's recommendation when we hired Peterson.
 
#109
#109
hatvol96 said:
Everyone keeps forgetting Villanova. I'm pretty sure they've made the Sweet 16 3 out of the last 4 years.
Click to expand...

Ya good call, the rise of dante's game has been a pleasent surprise for them. Stellar FT shooting in that league could potential reap really big benefits as it goes on.
 
#110
#110
hatvol96 said:
It amazes me that a guy can do as good a job in a major market as Jay Wright and get so little publicity. Little known fact: Wright was Grunfeld's recommendation when we hired Peterson.
Click to expand...
wow, we lost in that deal. I know 100% for sure that Tulsa was cool with BP leaving.
 
#111
#111
BigPapaVol said:
wow, we lost in that deal. I know 100% for sure that Tulsa was cool with BP leaving.
Click to expand...
I loved when Dickey got up at the introductory press conference touting that Peterson won the NIT at Tulsa. He omitted the fact that Self led much the same team to the Elite Eight the year before.
 
#112
#112
Hiring head coaches with only one year at the previous school tends not to work out too well (ask Arkansas about it too).
 
#114
#114
Thanks for fixing it. It's probably always a bad idea to hire bad head coaches. I was just saying schools shouldn't go overboard on a coach that has enjoyed success taking over someone else's players and system for one year.
 
#115
#115
Oldblood said:
Thanks for fixing it. It's probably always a bad idea to hire bad head coaches. I was just saying schools shouldn't go overboard on a coach that has enjoyed success taking over someone else's players and system for one year.
Click to expand...
I'm OK if they recognize solid coaching and have reason to believe in the recruiting. Guys took flyers on K and Knight, who are still my favorite coaches in the game.
 
#116
#116
BigPapaVol said:
I'm OK if they recognize solid coaching and have reason to believe in the recruiting. Guys took flyers on K and Knight, who are still my favorite coaches in the game.
Click to expand...

And both were coaches at Army for 5+ years with success before they were hired - not at a school for one year.
 
#117
#117
Oldblood said:
And both were coaches at Army for 5+ years with success before they were hired - not at a school for one year.
Click to expand...
Army took a flyer on Knight for sure and Duke took a flyer on K, most likely because of Knight's recommendation.
 
#118
#118
Not worth arguing about because we are talking apples and oragnes. Taking a flyer is OK, but extrapolating success based on one season is not.
 
#119
#119
Oldblood said:
Not worth arguing about because we are talking apples and oragnes. Taking a flyer is OK, but extrapolating success based on one season is not.
Click to expand...
I think that's true. Army had nothing to go on when it hired Knight. Similarly, Coach K had done little record wise that would have merited the Duke job. Both of those hires were a risk on basketball philosophy and the visible leadership character of the men involved.
 
#120
#120
BigPapaVol said:
I think that's true. Army had nothing to go on when it hired Knight. Similarly, Coach K had done little record wise that would have merited the Duke job. Both of those hires were a risk on basketball philosophy and the visible leadership character of the men involved.
Click to expand...
Knight had been the lead assistant under Tates Locke. They had a pretty good idea what they were getting.
 
#121
#121
hatvol96 said:
Knight had been the lead assistant under Tates Locke. They had a pretty good idea what they were getting.
Click to expand...
I'll give you that, but hiring assistants is always a crap shoot.

Regardless, I think taking a flyer when you do have that feel is the way to go. That was my point about the 1 year comment. I don't like it as a rule.
 
#122
#122
BigPapaVol said:
I'll give you that, but hiring assistants is always a crap shoot.

Regardless, I think taking a flyer when you do have that feel is the way to go. That was my point about the 1 year comment. I don't like it as a rule.
Click to expand...
I think hiring a guy after one successful season at, for example, Drake and bringing him to the Big East or letting a single Elite Eight run at Kent State convince you a guy will win at Arkansas is dangerous business. I'd be much more likely to promote an assistant I've been able to watch up close.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top