Coaching, coaching, coaching

[mweb]

Well, there seems to be some sort of contrived logic that there are few schools that can match:

- National championship in the last 10 years

- quality ACC program

- quality history

- Under Armor

- other things UMd has going for it like being in the ACC

That if I say IU has five banners hanging in Assembly Hall that a UMd guy would say that IU has been terrible for a couple years as if that's the end of the discussion. Or if a graduate of Kansas State, Texas, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Marquette, Pitt or Georgetown alum says that their schools have consistently done better in the tournament or maintained longer/higher top 10-20 rankings in the last few years, that UMd will point to their banner as if that's the winning point in the discussion. Or if a Florida, Syracuse or Mich State alum points to higher rankings, better tourney success AND a recent banner, that a UMd alum will point to Under Armor as the winning point in that discussion.

Guess what? Many schools have rich alumni in charge of private or public companies or are self-made that can assist the programs in various ways. Many school is putting up new facilities associated with its programs whether its a new weight room, new practice facility, new home for games, etc. Other schools are in good conferences.

Yes, if Maryland landed a recruiting monster like a Thad Matta, the school could be a top 15 program given the other items that are in place. But other schools have similar attributes in place and would vie for the same coach.

Maryland is a very good program at a very good university with a very good coach and a quality tradition. It's not top 15.

Poor reading comprehension at its finest. That's all, no point talking to you about this any further.

[TakebackOPACY]

Well, there seems to be some sort of contrived logic that there are few schools that can match:

- National championship in the last 10 years

- quality ACC program

- quality history

- Under Armor

- other things UMd has going for it like being in the ACC

That if I say IU has five banners hanging in Assembly Hall that a UMd guy would say that IU has been terrible for a couple years as if that's the end of the discussion. Or if a graduate of Kansas State, Texas, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Marquette, Pitt or Georgetown alum says that their schools have consistently done better in the tournament or maintained longer/higher top 10-20 rankings in the last few years, that UMd will point to their banner as if that's the winning point in the discussion. Or if a Florida, Syracuse or Mich State alum points to higher rankings, better tourney success AND a recent banner, that a UMd alum will point to Under Armor as the winning point in that discussion.

Guess what? Many schools have rich alumni in charge of private or public companies or are self-made that can assist the programs in various ways. Many school is putting up new facilities associated with its programs whether its a new weight room, new practice facility, new home for games, etc. Other schools are in good conferences.

Yes, if Maryland landed a recruiting monster like a Thad Matta, the school could be a top 15 program given the other items that are in place. But other schools have similar attributes in place and would vie for the same coach.

Maryland is a very good program at a very good university with a very good coach and a quality tradition. It's not top 15.

Hoosiers, what contrived logic? Define what criteria you are going to use. How much are you weighing in the last 5 years? last 10 years? overall history? etc. Are we supposed to ignore the National Championship? And the 2001 Final Four? Just don't use one set of criteria to rank IU ahead of MD and then change the criteria in order to rank Wisconsin ahead of them.

Earlier, you pointed out that OSU has been ranked Top 10 more than MD during Williams' tenure at MD. I pointed out that that's only true if you count the two years that OSU had Williams' recruits as upperclassmen. At the time, I didn't bother to point out that some of the other OSU Top 10 rankings were based on wins that the NCAA later took away. Since then, you seem to have changed your own criteria to suit your needs. The focus in your posts is now on the last 3 or 4 years. Again, which is it? How are you ranking your Top 15 programs?

If you want to look at history, there are 15 teams with more lifetime ncaa tourney wins than MD. You'll be glad to know that Michigan State, Indiana, and Ohio State are amongst those 15 teams. If you want to look at recent history, how recent? In the last 5 years, MD probably ranks somewhere in the low 30's. If you look at the last 10 years, MD is probably Top 15. If you want to look at the outlook for the next 3 or 4 years, that's really just today's ranking minus upperclassmen plus signed recruits plus what the coach can do with those recruits. That probably puts MD around 21-25.

By the way, I think most logical criteria would put MD somewhere between 16-20 as a program. If you focus strictly on the last few years and the outlook for the next few years, you probably put them between 21-30.

[Sports Guy]

Duke

UNC

Kansas

Kentucky

UCLA

The clear 5 best programs.

Arizona

Mich St

UCONN

Syracuse

Indiana

MD

OSU

Tenn

Florida

Wisconsin

Nova

GTown

WV..more up and coming than anything though

Purdue

Wake Forest

Memphis...we shall see if they can stay in this group

Pitt

There may be some that I am missing but generally speaking, these programs are the ones fighting with the top 5 in most years and can stake a claim to being a consistent top 20 program....the problem is none of them can really do it consistently.

Then you have your programs that every few years, put together good teams..like GT, Ariz St and BC, amongst many.

Then you have your programs that SHOULD be a lot better than they are...St Johns, DePaul, NC State, UVA..amongst many.

[hoosiers]

Hoosiers, what contrived logic? Define what criteria you are going to use. How much are you weighing in the last 5 years? last 10 years? overall history? etc. Are we supposed to ignore the National Championship? And the 2001 Final Four? Just don't use one set of criteria to rank IU ahead of MD and then change the criteria in order to rank Wisconsin ahead of them.

Earlier, you pointed out that OSU has been ranked Top 10 more than MD during Williams' tenure at MD. I pointed out that that's only true if you count the two years that OSU had Williams' recruits as upperclassmen. At the time, I didn't bother to point out that some of the other OSU Top 10 rankings were based on wins that the NCAA later took away. Since then, you seem to have changed your own criteria to suit your needs. The focus in your posts is now on the last 3 or 4 years. Again, which is it? How are you ranking your Top 15 programs?

If you want to look at history, there are 15 teams with more lifetime ncaa tourney wins than MD. You'll be glad to know that Michigan State, Indiana, and Ohio State are amongst those 15 teams. If you want to look at recent history, how recent? In the last 5 years, MD probably ranks somewhere in the low 30's. If you look at the last 10 years, MD is probably Top 15. If you want to look at the outlook for the next 3 or 4 years, that's really just today's ranking minus upperclassmen plus signed recruits plus what the coach can do with those recruits. That probably puts MD around 21-25.

By the way, I think most logical criteria would put MD somewhere between 16-20 as a program. If you focus strictly on the last few years and the outlook for the next few years, you probably put them between 21-30.

I appreciate your post - thanks. I was not trying to change any criteria, but thought I was addressing the changing criteria of the UMd supporters here in defining what a top 15 program was! Seems to me those supporters waffled by making statements about UMd not being a top 15 program, then insisting it could be a top 15 program with the coach removed to demanding a list of 15 better programs. I would agree with your outlook that Maryland has been very recently and is set up to be in the near future a 21-30 program overall with some better years mixed in.

Regarding OSU, I am speaking since Matta has gotten things going.

When people start making personal comments on my reading ability or such in front of the board, that is usually a signal for me to stop participating. I appreciate TBO's comments and decided to leave one more post - so this is my last post here. I appreciate the discussion.

[PaulBako]

Arizona

Mich St(close)

UCONN

Syracuse(close)

Indiana

OSU

Tenn

Florida

Wisconsin

Nova

GTown

WV..more up and coming than anything though

Purdue

Wake Forest

Memphis...we shall see if they can stay in this group

Pitt

The bold imo are the only programs better than Maryland.

[ccbird]

I appreciate your post - thanks. I was not trying to change any criteria, but thought I was addressing the changing criteria of the UMd supporters here in defining what a top 15 program was! Seems to me those supporters waffled by making statements about UMd not being a top 15 program, then insisting it could be a top 15 program with the coach removed to demanding a list of 15 better programs. I would agree with your outlook that Maryland has been very recently and is set up to be in the near future a 21-30 program overall with some better years mixed in.

Regarding OSU, I am speaking since Matta has gotten things going.

When people start making personal comments on my reading ability or such in front of the board, that is usually a signal for me to stop participating. I appreciate TBO's comments and decided to leave one more post - so this is my last post here. I appreciate the discussion.

Nobody waffled on anything. You're the only one who made a definitive statement that Maryland wasn't a top 15 school. I just want you to tell me 15 schools clearly better to make that statement. Let me be clear. As of today we are clearly a top 25 program though I don't think there are 15 schools that are clear cut ahead of us. That taking everything into a count. Recent history, prestige, resources,outlook for the near future, etc. We can debate back and forth the merits of, say, MD vs Pitt, or most other schools that in that 12-15 range but I don't think it's clear cut. The one thing I'll easily concede is that we currently aren't in the 2nd teir with schools like Uconn, Mich St, Syracuse, Arizona. That's where I think we can be as a program.

The following isn't necessarily directed at you because I'm not sure if you made this argument in one of your previous posts or not. I see people saying well Duke and UNC are in your conference so thats why it's very tough be a great program. I don't need or expect us to be on that level. There are 6 power conferences in AMerica where the big programs reside. PAC 10, Big 12, SEC, Big East, Big 10, ACC. Sure, once in awhile a school like UNLV or Memphis will pop onto the screen and be a top program from one of these other conferences but it's rare and it usually doesn't last long. Even if I assume every conference has two programs better than Maryland, like Duke and UNC in the ACC, that still can put MD in the 13-15 range. Maryland has clearly been the 3rd best school in the ACC for 15 years now. I have no problem playing 3rd fiddle to UNC and DUke and still being a Top 10-15 program. That's a very realistic possibility and goal.