RU and the Last 15 years of WBB Top 25 Polls-What does it Reveal?

[RizwranIII]

I researched the last 15 years (counting this season) of the USA/Coaches WBB poll. I could only find back to the 2002-03 season on the NCAA website.

From 2016-17 til the 2007-08 polls, the site posted the final post season poll. From 2006-07 til the 2002-03 polls, the site posted the standings after week 18. I'm not sure why and am hoping that this is after the end of the season, but can't be sure. But it still shows important info either way.

So what does this reveal? I will post the results first, and then give my opinion.

Season: RU top 25 Ranking

2002-03: 23
2003-04: not listed
2004-05: 7
2005-06: 9
2006-07: 19
2007-08: 6
2008-09: 21
2009-10: not listed
2010-11: not listed
2011-12: not listed
2012-13: not listed
2013-14: not listed
2014-15: 23
2015-16: not listed
2016-17: not listed as of Feb 13

My analysis is that this is strong evidence that the decline of CVS is not a recent phenomenon, but has been occurring for a number of years. Before this year, the talent CVS had remained very strong. 3 WNBA players (counting Tyler) last year. Every year before that during the rest of these 15 years CVS had anywhere from 4 to 6 McDonald All-Americans on every roster. 4 McDonald All-Americans is more than 80% of Big Ten teams have had in their whole combined histories.

So the call for CVS to go, is not a one year emotional decision. And there is no reason to believe RU will find the success of the past under the leadership of CVS.

 

[Knight Time Fan]

I researched the last 15 years (counting this season) of the USA/Coaches WBB poll. I could only find back to the 2002-03 season on the NCAA website.

From 2016-17 til the 2007-08 polls, the site posted the final post season poll. From 2006-07 til the 2002-03 polls, the site posted the standings after week 18. I'm not sure why and am hoping that this is after the end of the season, but can't be sure. But it still shows important info either way.

So what does this reveal? I will post the results first, and then give my opinion.

Season: RU top 25 Ranking

2002-03: 23
2003-04: not listed
2004-05: 7
2005-06: 9
2006-07: 19
2007-08: 6
2008-09: 21
2009-10: not listed
2010-11: not listed
2011-12: not listed
2012-13: not listed
2013-14: not listed
2014-15: 23
2015-16: not listed
2016-17: not listed as of Feb 13

My analysis is that this is strong evidence that the decline of CVS is not a recent phenomenon, but has been occurring for a number of years. Before this year, the talent CVS had remained very strong. 3 WNBA players (counting Tyler) last year. Every year before that during the rest of these 15 years CVS had anywhere from 4 to 6 McDonald All-Americans on every roster. 4 McDonald All-Americans is more than 80% of Big Ten teams have had in their whole combined histories.

So the call for CVS to go, is not a one year emotional decision. And there is no reason to believe RU will find the success of the past under the leadership of CVS.

Strictly a point of info - I think the earlier polls are end-of-season (pre-tourney) polls since we were in the 2007 final four. I think there were perhaps no polls done after the tourney in those years.

One of my long long objections has been to folks claiming we are / were an "elite" program. While we were very good for a long time - perhaps your listing will help to convince folks that "elite" was always a stretch.

Which has nothing to do with CVS's future.

 

[RutgersDon]

$700k for cvs is a massive overpayment that needs to be corrected quickly.Payment for results not for a history that has not existed for almost a decade.

 

[bac2therac]

stats do not lie. I realize the NCAA tourney is the end all be all but regular season counts for fans...RU not being a consistent top 25 team and playing at a high level during the season definitely hurt attendance after 2008 and now its down to just hundreds of die hards with no interest from the general public

 

[MADHAT1]

For a program that had outdated facilities and not much support from the administration ( from Grunninger's AD days till Hobbs came into play as AD) don't discount the 12 NCAA (2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 & 2015) appearances in those 15 years because it doesn't fit the bashing agenda some have when discussing CVS and the RU WBB program.
Dismissing the lack of support WBB program received under Grunninger and Mulcahy is totally unfair when talking about the WBB program and many RU MBB fans point that out when discussing how the facilities and lack of support by Mulcahy ruined the RU MBB program.

 

[RutgersDon]

For a program that had outdated facilities and not much support from the administration ( from Grunninger's AD days till Hobbs came into play as AD) don't discount the 12 NCAA (2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 & 2015) appearances in those 15 years because it doesn't fit the bashing agenda some have when discussing CVS and the RU WBB program.
Dismissing the lack of support WBB program received under Grunninger and Mulcahy is totally unfair when talking about the WBB program and many RU MBB fans point that out when discussing how the facilities and lack of support by Mulcahy ruined the RU MBB program.

Its over

 

[MADHAT1]

Its over

 

[HeavenUniv.]

How many other Power Five schools would keep a coach with this kind of record ? Not bashing,just asking.

 

[MADHAT1]

How many other Power Five schools would keep a coach with this kind of record ? Not bashing,just asking.

My opinion is biased, but trying to answer honestly :
If job depended on this year's record, I'd say very few if any.
Based on the 106-61 record over the past 5 years excluding this season) I'd say quite a few if the AD factors poor facilities and lack of financial support in the decision.
But I also will admit many of the top programs that would have kept CVS based because of that, would reverse themselves with this season factored in.
Rutgers has been surviving because of Vivian Stringer having name brand status , but other programs making the effort to make their WBB program better ( which RU hasn't until now) would probably replace a HC that was 106-61 the last 5 years ( with two NCAA appearances along with 2 WNITs) and 6-19 the current season .

If that p-5 program wasn't going to have all that's needed to have what it takes to get recruits interested they might keep the coach, but be ready to replace that coach if the next season didn't show marked improvement.

 

[bac2therac]

its not so much record as it is recruiting drying up and paying her that much money

 

[Knight Time Fan]

My opinion is biased, but trying to answer honestly :
If job depended on this year's record, I'd say very few if any.
Based on the 106-61 record over the past 5 years excluding this season) I'd say quite a few if the AD factors poor facilities and lack of financial support in the decision.
But I also will admit many of the top programs that would have kept CVS based because of that, would reverse themselves with this season factored in.
Rutgers has been surviving because of Vivian Stringer having name brand status , but other programs making the effort to make their WBB program better ( which RU hasn't until now) would probably replace a HC that was 106-61 the last 5 years ( with two NCAA appearances along with 2 WNITs) and 6-19 the current season .

If that p-5 program wasn't going to have all that's needed to have what it takes to get recruits interested they might keep the coach, but be ready to replace that coach if the next season didn't show marked improvement.

I actually don't think very many WBB programs would - absent other circumstances - make a change, even with this awful season. Most - there are some exceptions - schools are not that quick or driven to make a change without accumulated awfulness in WBB. Actually, most programs wouldn't be horribly disappointed with the record for the past 5 seasons. And one more win a season (111 - 56) would bring the record in line with her over all record at Rutgers.

My remark above about "elite" wasn't disrespectful. Some years ago, after the 2007 FF I determined that RU was, for about 10 years, close to the 9th best team in the country by almost any metric I used. That isn't chopped liver - but I also never understood folks who somehow called it "elite", a term I feel is reserved for the teams constantly contending for the final four. We were inconsistent at that.

 

[MADHAT1]

I actually don't think very many WBB programs would - absent other circumstances - make a change, even with this awful season. Most - there are some exceptions - schools are not that quick or driven to make a change without accumulated awfulness in WBB. Actually, most programs wouldn't be horribly disappointed with the record for the past 5 seasons. And one more win a season (111 - 56) would bring the record in line with her over all record at Rutgers.

My remark above about "elite" wasn't disrespectful. Some years ago, after the 2007 FF I determined that RU was, for about 10 years, close to the 9th best team in the country by almost any metric I used. That isn't chopped liver - but I also never understood folks who somehow called it "elite", a term I feel is reserved for the teams constantly contending for the final four. We were inconsistent at that.

I would consider being the 9th best program for 10 years an elite one during that time. But I see your point about being in final four constantly and think you had RU in the very good, not great, category for that time and I can't say \that's wrong.

As for making a change, if the school was supporting the program generously, I think a change would be made. Especially if it had great facilities.
If it treated its WBB program like RU does and has facilities in dire need of upgrade, the coach would be brought back

 

[RizwranIII]

My opinion is biased, but trying to answer honestly :
If job depended on this year's record, I'd say very few if any.
Based on the 106-61 record over the past 5 years excluding this season) I'd say quite a few if the AD factors poor facilities and lack of financial support in the decision.
But I also will admit many of the top programs that would have kept CVS based because of that, would reverse themselves with this season factored in.
Rutgers has been surviving because of Vivian Stringer having name brand status , but other programs making the effort to make their WBB program better ( which RU hasn't until now) would probably replace a HC that was 106-61 the last 5 years ( with two NCAA appearances along with 2 WNITs) and 6-19 the current season .

If that p-5 program wasn't going to have all that's needed to have what it takes to get recruits interested they might keep the coach, but be ready to replace that coach if the next season didn't show marked improvement.

I would consider being the 9th best program for 10 years an elite one during that time. But I see your point about being in final four constantly and think you had RU in the very good, not great, category for that time and I can't say \that's wrong.

As for making a change, if the school was supporting the program generously, I think a change would be made. Especially if it had great facilities.
If it treated its WBB program like RU does and has facilities in dire need of upgrade, the coach would be brought back

 

[RizwranIII]

Some wacky stuff happening again when I tried to post.

Just wanted to say if CVS is brought back, I could easily see 5 more years or more of not being in the Top 25.

I agree that most schools would be happy w our record the past 5 years. But not given the fact that the 5 years represent a decline from the past years and we are paying big bucks to the Head coach. Thanks to Julie Herman for making parts of CVS's contract based on performance, or she would still be pulling in a million/year. I think one incentive was a nice bonus if we made it to the Sweet 16.