fluoxetine said:

Just absolute nonsense given that when he shows up after losses and says "it's on me" people bash him for that too. Nothing short of ritual suicide on camera would satisfy you guys, you just want wins. Which is fine but why not just admit it.

Click to expand...

Sorry Floux this is not a spreadsheet and your way out of your depth. Just say your right and move on

seansherm said:

When it's safe to assume the 8 you bring in aren't going to be better? Three of them are freshman, who typically are their worst defensively as freshman.
If I had any belief RU could bring in a high number of actual players from the portal, I'd agree. However, we aren't moving on from the coach, who is a system/development guy, so let him go back to what he's at least decent at.

Click to expand...

I totally agree. However, see my other post. We can’t prioritize this at the expense of not addressing the major issues on the current roster. Internal development of players already in the program while blending in 4 new frosh is highly unlikely to resolve the issues on defense. If we don’t fix that we won’t / can’t win. Period.

Successful teams like Michigan State and Purdue excel at both ends of the court.Rutgers has been limited to one end of the court holding opponents to less than 70 points but the offense always had long scoring droughts.This season with Bailey and Harper the team has averaged over 76 points a game but the defense stinks allowing 100 points to Purdue and over 80 points in other games.Its mind boggling that Rutgers would have another losing season with Bailey and Harper on the court.

seansherm said:

People won't want to hear it, but we want anyone eligible to return to return.

Click to expand...

I don’t disagree. But “wanting” them to return is not the same thing as ear marking that as a top priority. It’s very different. I definitely don’t “want” to hear that keeping these players (any of them) should be our top priority (or as someone else put it, priorities 1, 2 and 3). In my opinion, for the team to improve decisions need to be made first and foremost to upgrade the defense. Yes, even if that means some of our current players aren’t happy and decide to move on.

richthedentist said:

Yes that is the problem and several people have shown our recruiting and retention has been god awful no matter how good freshman are you need upperclassmen in the program and with his absolutely crap recruiting the past few years theres basically no one in the program and you just are not going to win that way

Click to expand...

Look - let’s assume Ace and Dylan aren’t returning. There are 7 other scholarship players on the roster eligible to return and 4 incoming frosh. We’re technically allowed to carry up to 15 scholarship players on the roster. If everyone returns we can still bring in 4 kids from the portal, so sure, we 100% “want” everyone whose interested in coming back to return. There is zero chance we’re bringing in 5+ players from the portal who will all be significant upgrades to our current kids after another offseason of development. Get even 3 kids that turn out to be major upgrades to the defense and that’s a successful offseason for us in the portal.

Ridge 22 said:

How is retaining non B1G level players helpful? I get we need continuity, but with this group? Same thing last year as well. Anyone see a pattern?

Click to expand...

We’re not getting 6+ kids from the transfer portal who will help the team more than the 7 kids eligible to return. If we can add 3-4 big time contributors that would be amazing.

From this perspective, sure, we technically should “want” as many of the 7 kids who want to remain with the program after learning who we’re adding from the portal to stay.

Thats different from saying - we need to approach the offseason by making sure we keep these kids at all costs. Even if it means we don’t bring in a 5, etc. This, we simply cannot do unless we were looking to free fall down to the BIG basement cellar.

RUDivision said:

No but when you’re embarrassing the university, your team, and yourself it’s important to show up and be accountable. Another reason why Pike is not the guy.

Happy if he did no! Respect him if he did yes!!!!!!!

Can not demand accountability from your players if you don’t show accountability as a coach/leader.

Click to expand...

Just absolute nonsense given that when he shows up after losses and says "it's on me" people bash him for that too. Nothing short of ritual suicide on camera would satisfy you guys, you just want wins. Which is fine but why not just admit it.

RU848789 said:

Yes, for Metuchen, but also easily accessible for many other cities - are you looking for somewhere in particular?

Click to expand...

Thanks so much. I was looking for southern Middlesex co but I’ll take Metuchen.

seansherm said:

People won't want to hear it, but we want anyone eligible to return to return.

Click to expand...

double facts right here lol...for sure we should want everyone back and for sure most want to hear it

Poz struggles to get in on the legs of the taller longer guys. Bulking up to 197 where he has less reach and less of a strength advantage was a mistake, IMO.

Great kid, wish him the best.

Postman_1 said:

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/05/adp-jobs-report-february-2025-.html

Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

Let's see the data on Friday. ADP is absolute garbage. Just a random number generator. This is as per TL an FS Insights.

Mr Magoo said:

No problem with any of his picks except
maybe Kaufman-Renn on the 1st team

Click to expand...

In conference Kaufman-Renn averaged over 20ppg on 62% shooting. He belongs.

Plum Street said:

Which was that ?

Click to expand...

I think he was wrongfully referring to the wrongful ruler of Wrongdovia.

Postman_1 said:

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/03/05/adp-jobs-report-february-2025-.html

Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

lol. Fox blaming Biden. Not the tariffs, indiscriminate gutting fed work force. Talk of cutting Medicaid, Medicare, SS. Etc.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

The one thing that the Eagles have that the Giants don't is a great GM. That said, this move doesn't seem so brilliant. Schoen had the right notion, but it was just three years early. On top of that, he only needed to commit to Barkley for one year and still didn't get it. But Roseman is adding two more years to the two that Barkley still has remaining, and that certainly could come back to bite him in the ass.

NickRU714 said:

What is the objective of the AD:

• Is the goal to make the most revenue? Then obviously the Big Ten is the best conference.

• Is the goal to win and be competitive? An argument could be made the ACC or AAC would bea better level. ACC and AAC teams make the CBB tournament and new CFP tournament. There is longer a barrier to entry for CFB to compete for national championships.

Obviously the ideal is both. But one has to be higher than the other.
What's the point of all that money if we're not winning? Just to say we get it?

The problem is people compare Rutgers as a bottom tier Big Ten program against a bottom tier ACC/AAC.
They just assume we would be Seton Hall for some weird reason.

The comparison is bottom tier Big Ten against a mid-upper tier ACC/AAC.

Not sure why people assume Rutgers (with all it's advantages) wouldn't be successful in an easier league.

Click to expand...

When is the last time Rutgers was really success in any of it's leagues though? We weren't good in the Frankenstein AAC.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

Leonard23 said:

Tiered Revenue Sharing Will Forever Change College Sports Conferences

The ACC's new tiered revenue sharing, a product of its settlement with FSU and Clemson, could solve a growing issue for the richer Big Ten and SEC.

www.sportico.com

Click to expand...

Could be a trend of the future, in which case I assume the modern day conference structure would be on its last legs, and a Long anticipated breakaway could potentially happen

RUDivision said:

8 system guys who finished below 500 with 2 lottery picks? 8 system guys who can not guard a high school team?

Click to expand...

When it's safe to assume the 8 you bring in aren't going to be better? Three of them are freshman, who typically are their worst defensively as freshman.
If I had any belief RU could bring in a high number of actual players from the portal, I'd agree. However, we aren't moving on from the coach, who is a system/development guy, so let him go back to what he's at least decent at.

toby83 said:

Al doesn't get that these are 18 & 19 year olds. Motivation, drive, character all wildy carry from kid to kid. Some getting a check for first time, and the kid suddenly changes. Transfers on their second check couldn't give a **** about the school or team. Immature jealousy when they find out who got more,no longer invested.

Al doesn't get it. Thinks you pay for five and five work out. Wants us to pay for an unsustainable cash flow year after year. Clueless.

Click to expand...

That’s the coaches job to manage the team. Plenty of players getting checks on winning teams absolutely dialed into their respective programs.

Managing the team/players has always been a caution sign hanging in this program and guys who have left repeatedly signaled such.

As for you Mets/Yankees fans. They have never had a problem with the complete absurdity of the illusion of an equal playing field in baseball when it serves them as fans when their team spends $200M, $100M, etc more than their opponents.

In CBB, and football, at least our school/admin is spending as much as our peers (not the blue bloods). Rutgers and the state has been trying to drag the program to average for decades without the help of the fanbase. Yet the fanbase seems to always have the highest expectations.

We know the system. It’s evolved but still the cornerstone is alumni/fan support that augments the school budgets. If you don’t want to give, than reimagine how you view your expectations more inline with reality.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.