Should this be considered a successful season?

[glenn__davis]

I've seen a little discussion on this, and some "season appreciation" threads, but I thought it might be worth a poll to see where the board stood on this.

I'm keeping it simple - yes or no.

[Sports Guy]

I say yes but I do admit it depends on how you look at it.

For me, I thought MD was going to be around a 500 ACC team and be a bubble team...which is exactly what they were.

They got into the tourney and won a game....that always helps with recruiting.

You could argue that the team had more talent and should have been more comfortably in the tourney and should have had a higher seed but really, there is very little difference between a 6 seed and a 10 seed.

[ccbird]

I've seen a little discussion on this, and some "season appreciation" threads, but I thought it might be worth a poll to see where the board stood on this.

I'm keeping it simple - yes or no.

Ok I'll keep it simple

Yes, BUT..........

[mweb]

Yes, considering what my expectations for the team were.

However, I will say no in terms of what the program should be.

Voted yes.

[OregonBird]

Yes....but not an emphatic one. It's successful in my eyes only b/c with some of the disapointing losses this year I reduced my expectations which weren't high to begin with.

I think SG sums it up the best.

To mweb's point, I know this program can do better. Simply making the tourney and winning a game shouldn't be a barometer of success for this program.

[Sports Guy]

Yes....but not an emphatic one. It's successful in my eyes only b/c with some of the disapointing losses this year I reduced my expectations which weren't high to begin with.

I think SG sums it up the best.

To mweb's point, I know this program can do better. Simply making the tourney and winning a game shouldn't be a barometer of success for this program.

There are a lot of good programs that won't/didn't win more than 1 game in the tourney.

I do agree with your premise...Ultimately, the tourney means everything but still, not every year you are going to be able to go deep.

I mean, let's say they beat Morgan and UVA...MD is then what, a 7 seed? So, then end up playing a Mich St, Memphis or Oklahoma in the second round anyway.

[Birds of B'more]

Yes, considering what my expectations for the team were.

However, I will say no in terms of what the program should be.

Voted yes.

I think this is a great point and I think we have to consider the difference between the team and the program when evaluating.

I think the 08-09 team was a success simply because I think the final result was more than could be reasonably expected based on the assembled talent. The highs and lows had much larger swings than I ever imagined, but the overall result was a very good one. I thought they would be very fortunate just to make the NCAAs and would have given much better odds on another NIT appearance.

On the other hand, UM basketball as a program underachieved, and has done so for several years straight now. The recruiting mishaps, the feuding between the head coach and athletic department, and just the overall failure to bring in more talented players, especially when you have a combination of resources that 90% of Division 1 programs can only dream of.

[Jagwar]

For crying out loud, the team made the NCAA tournament (even won a game) with 21 wins on the season... with Dave Neal as the 5 and Landon Milbourne as the 4.

Emphatic YES.

[ccbird]

Ok I'll keep it simple

Yes, BUT..........

Yes, considering what my expectations for the team were.

However, I will say no in terms of what the program should be.

Voted yes.

And this was the But.

[glenn__davis]

And this was the But.

Yeah, I knew it wasn't really a yes/no type question, but I wanted to see people take a side.

Honestly, I remain a Gary-backer, but I think I'd answer no. I'm glad that a bunch of undersized, hard-working players were able to overachieve and make the tourney. Really, making it is a success in itself.

But I don't think a sub .500 conference record and 2nd round bow-out should be considered successful for Maryland. I realize that we ran into a buzzsaw today with Memphis, but I don't think we've made the Sweet 16 since Steve Blake was here.

[AgentOrange]

Yeah, I knew it wasn't really a yes/no type question, but I wanted to see people take a side.

Honestly, I remain a Gary-backer, but I think I'd answer no. I'm glad that a bunch of undersized, hard-working players were able to overachieve and make the tourney. Really, making it is a success in itself.

But I don't think a sub .500 conference record and 2nd round bow-out should be considered successful for Maryland. I realize that we ran into a buzzsaw today with Memphis, but I don't think we've made the Sweet 16 since Steve Blake was here.

But you know, the more we keep comparing point guards to Blake, the better shot we have to reach those levels again.

I voted yes just because we could only do so much with this roster. I hope GV stays because he does have some holes in his game that he would work on. If MD becomes a top 20 team next year with the bigs we are bringing in, I would have to say GV's stock would rise even more.

I like that we made the tourney, and I hope we don't have to suffer through too many more years like this in the future. We have too much going for us to be this type of team. Great fans, Great stadium, Great location. We need to be better than this, IMO.

[Dr. FLK]

If finishing below .500 in conference, losing at home to Morgan St., losing "must win games" down the stretch to UVA and Wake, barely making the tournament, and getting embarrassed in the second round constitutes a success, than this program is in worse shape than I thought.

This should be a top tier program. They should be parlaying a NC into a dominating program. Any season that doesn't involve finishing near the top of the ACC and making a legit sweet 16 run isn't a success in my book. I guess they did better than the recent NIT history, so we can say they "failed less" than they did last year. But this team just wasn't good.

[Dr. FLK]

But you know, the more we keep comparing point guards to Blake, the better shot we have to reach those levels again.

I voted yes just because we could only do so much with this roster. I hope GV stays because he does have some holes in his game that he would work on. If MD becomes a top 20 team next year with the bigs we are bringing in, I would have to say GV's stock would rise even more.

I like that we made the tourney, and I hope we don't have to suffer through too many more years like this in the future. We have too much going for us to be this type of team. Great fans, Great stadium, Great location. We need to be better than this, IMO.

I don't like the whole "look at how good we did with nothing" argument too much. Who assembled this team? Is the team really young and building to the future? Did they see the rise of a bunch of freshmen that give us confidence heading into next season? This was pretty much a wasted year. The only real freshmen who developed is Mosely. Milbourne got worse as the season went on. This team wasn't assembled to win now, and it doesn't contain players who are in position to win in the future.

Here's to better recruiting classes....:beerchug1:

[AgentOrange]

I don't like the whole "look at how good we did with nothing" argument too much. Who assembled this team? Is the team really young and building to the future? Did they see the rise of a bunch of freshmen that give us confidence heading into next season? This was pretty much a wasted year. The only real freshmen who developed is Mosely. Milbourne got worse as the season went on. This team wasn't assembled to win now, and it doesn't contain players who are in position to win in the future.

Here's to better recruiting classes....:beerchug1:

I agree with everything you said. And I do understand that it is not like Baseball where Gary doesn't have much of an influence on the roster, because he is the one that made his roster.

I do think they can get to a top 25 level next year though. I think Dino did a great job towards the end of the year to be a good first big off the bench.

If Milbourne could actually play his natural 3 position, I think he could have a huge Senior year. We just need to have the bigs step up to be able to put him down at that level.

I still think we had some good things happen to us with Tucker and Bowie. I think they are due for very strong junior seasons and Hayes looked really good at the end of the year. I think these guys can make a serious run next year if the Freshman pan out. And what happens if we get Stephenson? Long shot I know, but damn, it might set us up to make a little run next year.

[rolliefingers]

I'd have to say yes. I never thought these guys would make the tournament, and they did. And for all the controversy around Gary this year, I am glad that he's (apparently) sticking around.

Bottom line is he needs to recruit better. I like that he can get a lot out of a little, but is it too much to ask for him to get even more out of a lot?

I respect the guy's integrity, but I refuse to believe that every successful coach is out there doing shady stuff to get players.

He needs to do better, period. But this season was certainly a success, considering all the drama.