How many NJ teams are better than Rutgers ?
- Thread starter Kbee3
- Start date
How many of them have two completely empty recruiting classes due to a scandal that was featured everywhere from Sprotscenter to The Today Show to the NY Times?
The idea that having NO Junior and Senior Class due to the Rice incident should have no impact on Rutgers Basketball is the height of "hide your head in the sand" logic.
We have played seven games against "teams that matter": SJU, Creighton, Clemson, Wake, SHU, GW and Monmouth. We were relatively competitive in 5 of the 7. I would have liked to have won a couple, but we didn't. You need a thimble full of CBB knowledge to see this is not some "Little-pagean like" squad, effort or coaching job.
The idea that having NO Junior and Senior Class due to the Rice incident should have no impact on Rutgers Basketball is the height of "hide your head in the sand" logic.
We have played seven games against "teams that matter": SJU, Creighton, Clemson, Wake, SHU, GW and Monmouth. We were relatively competitive in 5 of the 7. I would have liked to have won a couple, but we didn't. You need a thimble full of CBB knowledge to see this is not some "Little-pagean like" squad, effort or coaching job.
"We have played seven games against "teams that matter": SJU, Creighton, Clemson, Wake, SHU, GW and Monmouth. We were relatively competitive in 5 of the 7. "
Geez, can you set the bar any lower ?
Geez, can you set the bar any lower ?
Last edited:
Two and a half years is a lifetime ago in college basketball.
We're not asking the current staff to build the Great Wall of China or the Pyramids or even an offensive line.
It's college basketball. Programs can be turned around quickly. Freshman and sophomores and j.c. recruits can have a huge impact.
Frankly, I'd settle for just seeing a little improvement. But I don't.
We're not asking the current staff to build the Great Wall of China or the Pyramids or even an offensive line.
It's college basketball. Programs can be turned around quickly. Freshman and sophomores and j.c. recruits can have a huge impact.
Frankly, I'd settle for just seeing a little improvement. But I don't.
It probably isn't fair to Eddie Jordan to evaluate his performance based on when/how he inherited the program. It is possible had he inherited the program under better conditions that he could succeed here.
We can argue until the cows come home. The bottom line is currently we are 2 1/2 years in the Jordan regime and we are in no better of a place and the future has never looked as bleak as it does right now. You have to be VERY optimistic to see a light at the end of the tunnel.
Rutghoops is one of the best posters we have. I just can't see how one can have any faith that Jordan has even a remote chance of turning this around.
When we talk about why we aren't successful it is all 100% valid and maybe no one could have succeeded. I just need some glimmer of hope. Sanders, Freeman, Johnson and Williams is half the puzzle. I just can't see how and where the other pieces come from.
We can argue until the cows come home. The bottom line is currently we are 2 1/2 years in the Jordan regime and we are in no better of a place and the future has never looked as bleak as it does right now. You have to be VERY optimistic to see a light at the end of the tunnel.
Rutghoops is one of the best posters we have. I just can't see how one can have any faith that Jordan has even a remote chance of turning this around.
When we talk about why we aren't successful it is all 100% valid and maybe no one could have succeeded. I just need some glimmer of hope. Sanders, Freeman, Johnson and Williams is half the puzzle. I just can't see how and where the other pieces come from.
GRFIG
First, thank you for the kind words. Please know the feeling is mutual.
My opinion is there are a litany of factors working against Rutgers in even the most optimal conditions. Poor facilities, no tradition, the lowest giving rate among alum of all P5 schools, etc. When you take a program like that and "gut it", like what happened after Mike Rice, you have an almost Herculean task to simply bring it back to respectability. Danny Hurley, who I like, saw the landscape at Rutgers post-Rice and realized the task was enormous. Hence his seven year contract demand.
Back in the Gary Waters days I was speaking to a big time P5 HC and we got to talking about Rutgers. His comment then stuck with me: "Rutgers recruits from the same barrel as other Big East schools, but it is from the bottom of that barrel where they can get kids". Winning at Rutgers is simply an enormous job in optimal conditions.
As for Eddie, enough people I respect like him as an HC. In 2 1/2 years he has recruited close to 20 kids to Rutgers. Some look decent. Most have fizzled out. I am not in any way surprised by that (see Waters quote above). While there are things that I personally question and/or shake my head regarding Eddie I can't lose sight of what I believe is the only way Rutgers can win. That is Rutgers can only win with a veteran team of under rated (by the services) kids who grow together and play together and figure it out together.
Whether Eddie is "that guy" I can honestly say I do not know. What I do know is it is way too soon for me personally to make a judgment either way.
Being in real estate I will make an analogy I am comfortable with. The Mike Rice scandal took a flame thrower to what was already a run down house. To say we aren't happy with the rebuild when we have just poured the foundation seems a bit premature.
First, thank you for the kind words. Please know the feeling is mutual.
My opinion is there are a litany of factors working against Rutgers in even the most optimal conditions. Poor facilities, no tradition, the lowest giving rate among alum of all P5 schools, etc. When you take a program like that and "gut it", like what happened after Mike Rice, you have an almost Herculean task to simply bring it back to respectability. Danny Hurley, who I like, saw the landscape at Rutgers post-Rice and realized the task was enormous. Hence his seven year contract demand.
Back in the Gary Waters days I was speaking to a big time P5 HC and we got to talking about Rutgers. His comment then stuck with me: "Rutgers recruits from the same barrel as other Big East schools, but it is from the bottom of that barrel where they can get kids". Winning at Rutgers is simply an enormous job in optimal conditions.
As for Eddie, enough people I respect like him as an HC. In 2 1/2 years he has recruited close to 20 kids to Rutgers. Some look decent. Most have fizzled out. I am not in any way surprised by that (see Waters quote above). While there are things that I personally question and/or shake my head regarding Eddie I can't lose sight of what I believe is the only way Rutgers can win. That is Rutgers can only win with a veteran team of under rated (by the services) kids who grow together and play together and figure it out together.
Whether Eddie is "that guy" I can honestly say I do not know. What I do know is it is way too soon for me personally to make a judgment either way.
Being in real estate I will make an analogy I am comfortable with. The Mike Rice scandal took a flame thrower to what was already a run down house. To say we aren't happy with the rebuild when we have just poured the foundation seems a bit premature.
Last edited:
Sounds like some are going to blame Mike Rice longer than Obama blamed Bush.
Horse puckey:
Corey Chandler
Mike Coburn
Earl Pettis
Justin Sofman
Mike Rosario
Greg Echenique
Patrick Jackson
Christian Morris
Dane Miller
Austin Johnson
Brian Okam
Those are his three recruiting classes. Fred Hill was not a good recruiter while at RU. Mike Rice was a better recruiter.
And please don't cite Rivals rankings. Please. The key to being a good recruiter is getting kids like Douby or Terry Dehere or Mark Bryant, not kids who can't play high level basketball regardless of their Rivals ranking. Kids like Whitehead or Jerry Walker who can play high level basketball AND are rated highly also make for a good recruiter. Getting Kids like Corey Chandler or that tall PG from Illinois who was highly rated but couldnt play for you doesn't mean you can recruit (imo).
Last edited:
As you state....I believe the problem RU has and had is fishing in the wrong body of water.
We end up with leftovers. The worst 3 star recruit isn't equivalent to best 2 star recruit. when a 4 star picks Rutgers you have to wonder why.
We end up with leftovers. The worst 3 star recruit isn't equivalent to best 2 star recruit. when a 4 star picks Rutgers you have to wonder why.
Well, Bush DID get us into that awful foreign policy disaster that was his phony invasion of Iraq. And he was leading the country when we hit that iceberg known as the Great Recession.
Those two can't be fixed quickly with a couple of jc transfers and some hot shot freshmen recruits.
Nope, that's on Eddie and he and his staff certainly have work to do for the 2016 class.
Do you think Eddie is responsible for having one non-transfer upperclassman on this roster?
I believe Seton Hall has no non-transfer upperclassman left on their roster. They have none that play. They seem to be doing ok.
They
They haven't been to the NCAA tournament since 2006. Just want to be sure I understand your definition of "doing ok".
They haven't been to the NCAA tournament since 2006. Just want to be sure I understand your definition of "doing ok".
You were pointing our roster and lack of upper classman - I assume you mean this is one of the reasons we are awful. You asked if this was "Eddies fault"
Seton Hall has a similar roster, with zero upperclassman that are non transfers. This issue does not seem to be hampering them. They are 9-2 and beat us by 29.
I would define that as doing ok.
Not really into half season results. SHU was 13-2 last season at one point, in the Top 25 and then didn't even make the NIT. Heck, Kyle Flood was 6-0 and in the Top 25 too. Not a fan of throwing parades for teams halfway through a season.
The notion that there are many NJ teams better than Rutgers,the State University ,is just further explanation as to what happens when there is lack of attention for far too many years.Fans really are running out of topics to discuss when it pertains to mens basketball.
Taking it to the extreme and missing the point, whether it's intentional or not.
At what point are you willing to criticize Eddie? Losing to UMass-Lowell? Going 0-for the Big Ten? Next year? Not ever?
Who here expects a basketball program to have a scandal of biblical proportions and then immediately recruit better ? Remember, that starting point 2.5 years was way below average recruiting.
Scandals help recruiting ? Lampooned on SNL helps recruiting? High Profile athletes like Kobe Bryant saying he would never send his son to Rutgers helps recruiting ? REALLY ? Add in our 0-25 year drought on NCAA appearances and Recruiting against Rutgers is now the easiest job in college basketball.
Delusional people thinking that Rutgers can have a quick build....Rock bottom is where you land after a big coaching change and turmoil in your program.......I'll repeat it again, 6-25, 10-22 and 12-20 is where mighty Indiana landed.....AND Rutgers aint Indiana in terms of having a winning tradition. Indiana averaged about 20 wins per year and went rock bottom to 6,10 and 12 !! Rutgers averaged 15 and rock bottom is 10. Mighty Indiana went 1-15 one year in the BIG 10.
Scandals help recruiting ? Lampooned on SNL helps recruiting? High Profile athletes like Kobe Bryant saying he would never send his son to Rutgers helps recruiting ? REALLY ? Add in our 0-25 year drought on NCAA appearances and Recruiting against Rutgers is now the easiest job in college basketball.
Delusional people thinking that Rutgers can have a quick build....Rock bottom is where you land after a big coaching change and turmoil in your program.......I'll repeat it again, 6-25, 10-22 and 12-20 is where mighty Indiana landed.....AND Rutgers aint Indiana in terms of having a winning tradition. Indiana averaged about 20 wins per year and went rock bottom to 6,10 and 12 !! Rutgers averaged 15 and rock bottom is 10. Mighty Indiana went 1-15 one year in the BIG 10.
Last edited:
I think this. Taking over after Rice isn't easy. But a good coach could do it. The black-eye for RU was that it had a complete j-hole for a coach, not that RU itself was rotten to the core. A good, new coach can take advantage of that: "that's over, he's gone, RU is still a good school with a strong recent history of academic performance by its players, great conference and let's go." He'd have to deal with facilities issues, no doubt. But the Rice thing would repeatedly give him a springboard to talk about what RU is, not isn't.
That's not to say that it would be easy, or wouldn't be harder than it otherwise would be. But it wouldn't be debilitating, as some here suggest. If EJ had the goods, he'd be able to accomplish something.
But he hasn't. It's been a complete free fall. He hasn't brought in the players. In fact, he brought in one of his guys, and that player transferred on him. The loss numbers are crazy high and going up. The points margin have been at times ridiculous. And now, in a class that even you attribute to his abilities, he has had a complete swing and a miss -- not one guy -- during a period when you understand that he has a shortage of good personnel -- or even just any personnel.
You couldn't write a script that screams more that this particular guy isn't the one for the job. I never bought much into the "healing" purpose of a new coach. A new coach should be brought in to win basketball and do it the right way. That should always be the goal, whether your previous coach threw basketballs at the players or not. And, if done properly, the "healing" would naturally happen. But it seems Eddie has embraced the healing part and is doing not nearly enough about the winning part. Did Mike Rice make him miss the last court club meeting or have NJ coaches not know who his assistants are?
Sometimes things are obvious. This is one of those times. He'll always be a great loyal son. I appreciate his trying to get things back on track. But it just hasn't worked out.
this is your recruiting pitch....lol
A good, new coach can take advantage of that: "that's over, he's gone, RU is still a good school with a strong recent history of academic performance by its players, great conference and let's go."
You forgot to throw in our long history of getting to the dance and attracting good recruits with our top notch facilities.......oh wait
Baylor had a one player murder another and a coach cover it up, yet they recovered faster than a coach who got fired for throwing some basketballs. Why? They hired the right coach.
The right coach would have turned this around already. Mike Rice is long gone history. The only people who talk about him anymore are those on this board.
Scott Drew (Baylor):
8-21
9-19
4-13
15-16
I know facts suck and all, but come on. Explain to me how those first three years illustrate Baylor "recovered faster than a coach who got fired for throwing some basketballs."
Cali is not big fan of facts and he is just repeating what BAC previously posted when I provided the 3 year record for tradition rich Indiana of 6-25, 10-22 and 12-20.
You're right. Eddie has a few more wins. How about the more important recruiting? Let's look at those facts.
I just don't see it. I think taking over after Rice, plus facilities, plus lowest alum financial support among all P5 schools, plus no history or tradition, plus second tier program behind football, plus every local AAU program turning their back on us post-Rice,is a monumental task. And I certainly believe it to be a job that in no way can I evaluate when Eddie's first class has played 11 games of their Sophomore season.
The idea a "good coach can do it" is folly (imo). Schools like St. Anthony's, Paterson Catholic, Rice, South Kent Prep, plus AAU programs like Playaz, DC Assault, etc. etc. have all but closed their doors to Rutgers after sending kids to play for Mike Rice. We went from fighting "Rutgers isn't committed to basketball" on the recruiting trail to "they f--ked our best players when we finally sent them kids". You don't just walk back into those gyms and have staffs waiting with open arms. Not saying recruiting is impossible just that it got even more difficult post-Rice.
I like Eddie and think he is a good HC, but to be clear I am in no way shape or form stating his success here is a "done deal". I just believe it is way too soon to evaluate one way or the other.
In Drew's third year post murder scandal, he landed three 4* players. Eddie has 0 players. The next year Drew won 15 games. Does anyone see any chance in hell Eddie will win 15 games next year?
Recruiting is moving the goal posts, lol? I see you like facts, but can't deal with those.
