Coaching, coaching, coaching

[BaltimoreTerp]

I'm just getting to this thread, so I want to bring up a couple points I have, even if the main discussion was about 30,000 words ago.

1) Let's say you have a student who goes to Maryland for journalism. They join the newspaper, and quickly show a talent for reporting and writing that is developed by the teachers at the college. By the spring of their junior year, they are editor-in-chief. That summer, through connections at the college, they get an internship where they show off their talent in the real world, and by end of the summer major newspapers are offering positions as writers. That student decides to take a job and drop out of school.

Now, should that student become a black mark against the university? Or should they be praised as a success story that shows what the journalism school can do for a prospective student?

2) Let's say you have a student who goes to Maryland for journalism. They have never been a particularly diligent student, and on their own for the first time they skip class and ignore homework. The university and the journalism school do everything they can from talks by the professors to meeting with advisors to warnings, and though they stave off the inevitable, the student is eventually asked not to return.

Now, should that student become a black mark against the university? Or should they be used to show that the school can only do so much to help someone that doesn't show a desire to be helped?

The real issue is that the NCAA has become so paranoid in every aspect of how college sports, especially basketball and football, looks to the media and the general public that they have put in place measuring tools that don't have any real use other than creating a false view of "good" academics versus "bad" academics.

If the NCAA cared about how things really worked, they would actually look into the way individual colleges work academically (such as Maryland's rule about the final semester) and also the specific situations of individual athletes to create an accurate picture of what is going on at a college rather than simply say a coach isn't graduating his players.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Some years they will be better, others worse.

That's the key point to me.

People get spoiled by the "better", so when the "worse" comes around they start to get upset. And when both the "better" and "worse" come in streaks, the effects are exponentially larger.

[mweb]

I don't think this is a fact....There is a lot to love about the potential of this program...DC/balt area, Comcast, etc....But despite all of that, MD should usually be a program that is around that 20-30 range and I think that's about where they are...Some years they will be better, others worse.

I think part of the problem is people expect too much out of the program.

Talking about potential, I think it's fact. They've been better under Gary and Lefty. So obviously the potential is there. If you want to talk about what is realistic, well that's different. Plus, a great coach can bring a team even above the perceived potential of a program. Look at Duke.

What are the reasons why they shouldn't be a top 20 program?

[hoosiers]

This really isn't true....The Baltimore/DC area has arguably the best basketball in high school.

MD has the best arena in the sport if you are looking at it from a pure facilities standpoint.

They have under armour backing as well.

MD is also in the ACC, which is usually the better basketball conference.

BTW, back to the coaching...You are a big 10 guy...The coaching in the big 10 is superb and one of the reasons I think you are seeing them do a pretty good job in the tourney over the last few years.

Not sure why this isn't true. Ohio State was a top five program behind Jimmy Jackson and Lawrence Funderburke when Williams left and has been a top 10 program more often than UMd during GW's time in College Park. I think it's a pretty simple statement to say GW would have had more shots at the national championship and more higher ranked teams at OSU.

[Birds of B'more]

I am not sure I agree...We have had this discussion a lot on here. MD is one of the schools that certainly could be up there but I think 10-20 is expecting too much.

I would differentiate between where MD's potential ceiling lies and where expectations are. Expectations were admittedly too high after two consecutive Final Four appearances and a National Championship. Not even the elite programs can sustain that high-level of success over an extended period. But I just look at UM's resources and believe that if they were to maximize them all, then they would be better than what we've seen over the past 7 seasons. Consider everything UM has going for it: great facilities (Comcast), fan/donor support, the ACC, excellent TV exposure, large media market. Not many programs can boast all that. And then of course there's the great local prep talent, and unfortunately that's where UM has fallen short.

[mweb]

Not sure why this isn't true. Ohio State was a top five program behind Jimmy Jackson and Lawrence Funderburke when Williams left and has been a top 10 program more often than UMd during GW's time in College Park. I think it's a pretty simple statement to say GW would have had more shots at the national championship and more higher ranked teams at OSU.

Ohio St has also had many poor years during that time if I recall correctly. Yeah, they have had better talent recently, but can't that be attributed to recruiting ability? Do you think Gary lands guys like Oden if he's at OSU?

[ccbird]

MD's ceiling is higher than that. They have the potential to be a consistent 10-20 team' date=' IMO.[/quote']

Of course they do. There is no reason MD can't be on par with the program that beat them today. If Gary recruited better we would already be there. Just like Gary, Izzo is a a great game coach who doesn't get his hands dirty recruiting, but he hits the trail hard and locks up a lot of the local talent. Mich St has 9 current players from Mich and 5 others from Ohio, Wis, and Minn. Nobody is going to mention them in the same breath as Duke, UNC, Kentucky, UCLA, Kansas but they bring the good year in and year out. Look at what they have done in the 10 years since their NC: 3 Final Fours, 1 Elite Eight, 2 Sweet 16s, and 5 1st or second round exits. Now, I'm not saying I expect us to make the tourny every year and average a deep run every other year but we can be close to consistency of their program. Maybe instead of losing in the 1st round we don't make the tourny and instead of getting to 3 FInal Fours we only get to 1 but we have a 2 or 3 Elite Eight runs. I understand that in the NCAA tourny sometimes the final result isn't always equivalant to the talent of your team. SOmetimes you get knocked out early with a very good team and likewise sometimes you can get hot and make a deep run with an average team. Still, there hasn't been one team since '03 that any Maryland fan could have really expected to make a deep tourny run and of course they haven't come close.

[beaner]

Not sure why this isn't true. Ohio State was a top five program behind Jimmy Jackson and Lawrence Funderburke when Williams left and has been a top 10 program more often than UMd during GW's time in College Park. I think it's a pretty simple statement to say GW would have had more shots at the national championship and more higher ranked teams at OSU.

Is this true? Since 1990, OSU Hoops has had the following seasons:

15-13

13-16

6-22

10-17

10-17

8-22

17-15

14-16

They've made 12 NCAA's and 2 Final Fours... The Jackson/Funderburke teams never made it past the Elite Eight (albeit under Ayres). He might have done more with them in the early 90s, but...

Maryland in that same time has made 14 NCAA's, with 2 Final Fours and a National title. This coming after almost facing the death penalty.

[Birds of B'more]

Of course they do. There is no reason MD can't be on par with the program that beat them today. If Gary recruited better we would already be there. Just like Gary, Izzo is a a great game coach who doesn't get his hands dirty recruiting, but he hits the trail hard and locks up a lot of the local talent. Mich St has 9 current players from Mich and 5 others from Ohio, Wis, and Minn. Nobody is going to mention them in the same breath as Duke, UNC, Kentucky, UCLA, Kansas but they bring the good year in and year out. Look at what they have done in the 10 years since their NC: 3 Final Fours, 1 Elite Eight, 2 Sweet 16s, and 5 1st or second round exits. Now, I'm not saying I expect us to make the tourny every year and average a deep run every other year but we can be close to consistency of their program.

I've been trying to think of another program that is a good and reasonable benchmark for MD. Mich St seems close, but consider that there is no UNC or Duke in the Big 10. The closest thing to that sort of program is Indiana, and they've been in the crapper ever since the Terps beat them for the NC. But what is undeniable is the success that Izzo and the Spartans have after they reach the NCAAs. And as long as you get there, the conference you play in doesn't mean anything....so perhaps they should be MD's benchmark.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Not sure why this isn't true. Ohio State was a top five program behind Jimmy Jackson and Lawrence Funderburke when Williams left and has been a top 10 program more often than UMd during GW's time in College Park. I think it's a pretty simple statement to say GW would have had more shots at the national championship and more higher ranked teams at OSU.

Depends. Ohio State has five Top-10 finishes over that period in the final AP poll to Maryland's three, but there are two factors. First is the competition in their conference, already mentioned. Second is that two of those finishes came in 1991 and 1992 which would have been the junior and senior seasons for Williams' last class there, white the other three have all been within the past decade.

Also, why stop at Top-10? Make it Top-20, and Maryland leads in appearances over the same period 10-8. 11-8 in Top-25.

So, what is more impressive?

EDIT: AP Poll data found here, in case someone wants to search the weekly polls.

[PaulBako]

I am not sure I agree...We have had this discussion a lot on here. MD is one of the schools that certainly could be up there but I think 10-20 is expecting too much.

Maryland does have that potential...what Birds of Bmore said. Great facilities, Large Market, Under Armour, to recruits maybe 10-30 minutes from college park, htis program has high potential.

[Sports Guy]

Maryland does have that potential...what Birds of Bmore said. Great facilities, Large Market, Under Armour, to recruits maybe 10-30 minutes from college park, htis program has high potential.

But the problem is they are competing against a lot of other great programs.

The top 5 programs are UNC, UCLA, Kentucky, Duke and Kansas...in whatever order you want to put them.

Those 5 schools suck up a lot of top recruits every year and MD has no chance of breaking into that group.

And then there are a ton of programs, which you could include MD in I guess, that can easily compete with MD.

I guess I can agree the potential is there but I don't think it is realistic potential...at least on a consistent basis.

[beaner]

But the problem is they are competing against a lot of other great programs.

The top 5 programs are UNC, UCLA, Kentucky, Duke and Kansas...in whatever order you want to put them.

Those 5 schools suck up a lot of top recruits every year and MD has no chance of breaking into that group.

And then there are a ton of programs, which you could include MD in I guess, that can easily compete with MD.

I guess I can agree the potential is there but I don't think it is realistic potential...at least on a consistent basis.

I like that order.

[ccbird]

Talking about potential, I think it's fact. They've been better under Gary and Lefty. So obviously the potential is there. If you want to talk about what is realistic, well that's different. Plus, a great coach can bring a team even above the perceived potential of a program. Look at Duke.

What are the reasons why they shouldn't be a top 20 program?

They are still a top 20 program as it is now. To think they can't be top 10 with their resources and history is wishful thinking from a Duke fan. Kansas,UCLA, Duke, UNC, Kentucky. Those are elite programs. I want to know why Maryland can't expect to be in the 2nd teir with programs like UConn, Mich St, Syracuse, heck give me two more to get to 10 that I can't even come up with right now. Arizona???? Louisville????

Here is the thing. It comes back to what I was saying before about our post Gary outlook and hope for the future. Maryland as a program has staying power as a relevant school because of their resources and not reliant just on a coach or recent tradition. Some of these schools only have a coach going for them. UConn wasn't really on the map before Calhoun or Syracuse before Boeheim and they aren't exactly located in ideal areas for basketball. Those are schools where the next coach is going to have to carry over the tradition left by these coaches and not slip because if he does it could be very hard getting the program back. I'm not fully convinced that Duke isn't in danger of falling from the top teir after K leaves. I'm not sure that they are at place where UNC,Kentucky, or UCLA is where no matter how many down years they have you know it's only a matter of time before they are great again because of their long, storied tradition.

[Sports Guy]

I like that order.

I am sure you do...To have Calipari in the top 3 is like a wet dream for you!