Welcome to The Holy Land of Hoops

Bill, yes that's what I'm saying. Without Calhoun's influence, UCONN is uconn. Are they terrible? No. They are a mediocre to decent team, however that's a radical shift from just several seasons ago when they were right up there with Kentucky, Duke, Kansas, etc. Without Calhoun, I don't care who the recruiter was...the guy was already a bonafide HOFer. Calhoun got Napier and Napier had one of the BEST INDIVIDUAL tourney performances EVER! He won the MVP and at the time ESPN, SI, etc. were raving about how he put the team on his back for that run. It was discussed as being one of the best individual performances in the tourney...ever. To act like a guy who averaged 21.1 pts throughout the tournament was not the clear MVP and not the reason they won is ridiculous. Of course it's a team effort, but would you bet your house that without Napier that year they would have won or even made a deep run? I'd bet my house they wouldn't have won it all without him. And again he's here because of Calhoun. Assistants can help recruit players but it ultimately comes down to the head coaches. I could serve as an assistant coach for coach K, will you give me all the credit when we win championships with players I recruited? Clearly coach K deserves no credit, it was all me!

http://collegebasketball.nbcsports.com/ ... title-run/

In relation to where they were recently, they are most definitely on a clear downward path. When's the last time you heard of UConn losing recruiting battles to St. John's? Again, they had to settle for a 2 star grad transfer to help fill out their depth chart. Not saying he can't be good but it speaks volumes when a program that was a blue blood a handful of years ago is now forced to settle for a 2 star. I named 3 clear underachieving seasons not 1. These 3 seasons have also been consecutive. True, 1 season does not make a trend but 3 seasons can. You are acting like the departure of Calhoun and the AAC era coinciding with this downward trend are totally by chance when there is significant correlation. Again, UConn may turn it around next year, who knows? All some of us are saying is that UConn is clearly trending down. By UConn standards, the past 3 seasons have been an abomination. By Bethune-Cookman's standards, it's a pretty nice 3 years.

Stars don't matter in regards to a player who has already been in college for 4 years. Would you assign a 2 star rating to Kyron Cartwright? But here is a tidbit about UConn's newest player that backs you up. He has never averaged more than 5 points a game for an Ivy League school and was out last year with injury.

These are players that UConn takes all the time through the years... Nothing to see here, no reason for alarm

I don't believe Ollie has the ability to develop his players. He has had some pretty good recruiting classes, but the product on the floor didn't show it.

It's not been 3 seasons. Folks here want to say you have to take what the actual results are. Well 2 years ago, UConn won the AAC tournament and made the 2nd round before losing to Kansas. Won 25 games. That's not a bad season.

FriarJ wrote:Stars don't matter in regards to a player who has already been in college for 4 years. Would you assign a 2 star rating to Kyron Cartwright? But here is a tidbit about UConn's newest player that backs you up. He has never averaged more than 5 points a game for an Ivy League school and was out last year with injury.

These are players that UConn takes all the time through the years... Nothing to see here, no reason for alarm

Agree that stars aren't everything and there have been several times I've seen great players on TV and looked them up only to see them as 2 star recruits originally. My point was that settling for a 2 star recruit because all others denied them is a pretty shocking development for them. It tells a lot...you can read between the lines. It's much easier recruiting against them now with our FS1 deal with all the games on national TV and a vastly better conference. It's not 1 bad season, it's 3. They have not been in the rankings much during recent years, and they laid an egg recruiting this year. What Bill isn't seeing is not just their underwhelming performance the past 3 years, but their projection in the near future. Recruiting is the lifeblood of college hoops. If you strike out recruiting, your results are almost always poor.

One school in the country can boast of 4 natty's in the last 20 years: UCONN.

The fact that fans are suggesting that a recruiting class ranked in the 40s as acceptable for their pedigree is all you need to know about the state of UCONN recruiting. But that's their reality...they used to be able to brag to recruits about some serious marquee matchups in conference every year, with Cincy being the lowest ranked of the "good games." Until Wichita, Cincy-UCONN is the marquee matchup of the AAC. The conference is better with the Shockers...but anyone but the most avid sports fan can't even tell you half the schools in the AAC.

As to the question about what to do with football? Drop it. I know it won't happen but football at UCONN is a money pit because most UCONN fans don't appear to care about football. 40,000 seat stadium that sold out 12 times in the last decade. The "competition" is selling out stadiums that are 50-150% larger than that and have the budget that reflects same. UCONN could probably be consistently competitive at FCS because that's what they are...an FCS football school trying to compete with teams that are out of their league.

Savannah Jay wrote:One school in the country can boast of 4 natty's in the last 20 years: UCONN.

The fact that fans are suggesting that a recruiting class ranked in the 40s as acceptable for their pedigree is all you need to know about the state of UCONN recruiting. But that's their reality...they used to be able to brag to recruits about some serious marquee matchups in conference every year, with Cincy being the lowest ranked of the "good games." Until Wichita, Cincy-UCONN is the marquee matchup of the AAC. The conference is better with the Shockers...but anyone but the most avid sports fan can't even tell you half the schools in the AAC.

As to the question about what to do with football? Drop it. I know it won't happen but football at UCONN is a money pit because most UCONN fans don't appear to care about football. 40,000 seat stadium that sold out 12 times in the last decade. The "competition" is selling out stadiums that are 50-150% larger than that and have the budget that reflects same. UCONN could probably be consistently competitive at FCS because that's what they are...an FCS football school trying to compete with teams that are out of their league.

I have a sneaky suspicion that their recruiting class wont be ranked in the 40s with that new assistant they got. They did lose some recruits with a staff shake up but its foolish to think those coaches at UConn wont be reeling in top talent in a normal year. Chillious is about as good as they get.

I also don't think they have to worry about marquee matchups. Let's be honest, only avid sports fans can tell you who is in every conference. There are a lot of banners in those gyms just like there are banners in our gyms (except for maybe Memphis, who had their taken away).

CrawfishBucket wrote:

Savannah Jay wrote:One school in the country can boast of 4 natty's in the last 20 years: UCONN.

The fact that fans are suggesting that a recruiting class ranked in the 40s as acceptable for their pedigree is all you need to know about the state of UCONN recruiting. But that's their reality...they used to be able to brag to recruits about some serious marquee matchups in conference every year, with Cincy being the lowest ranked of the "good games." Until Wichita, Cincy-UCONN is the marquee matchup of the AAC. The conference is better with the Shockers...but anyone but the most avid sports fan can't even tell you half the schools in the AAC.

As to the question about what to do with football? Drop it. I know it won't happen but football at UCONN is a money pit because most UCONN fans don't appear to care about football. 40,000 seat stadium that sold out 12 times in the last decade. The "competition" is selling out stadiums that are 50-150% larger than that and have the budget that reflects same. UCONN could probably be consistently competitive at FCS because that's what they are...an FCS football school trying to compete with teams that are out of their league.

I have a sneaky suspicion that their recruiting class wont be ranked in the 40s with that new assistant they got. They did lose some recruits with a staff shake up but its foolish to think those coaches at UConn wont be reeling in top talent in a normal year. Chillious is about as good as they get.

I also don't think they have to worry about marquee matchups. Let's be honest, only avid sports fans can tell you who is in every conference. There are a lot of banners in those gyms just like there are banners in our gyms (except for maybe Memphis, who had their taken away).

We had Slice aka one of the best in the business and he did absolutely nothing here.

CrawfishBucket wrote:

Savannah Jay wrote:One school in the country can boast of 4 natty's in the last 20 years: UCONN.

The fact that fans are suggesting that a recruiting class ranked in the 40s as acceptable for their pedigree is all you need to know about the state of UCONN recruiting. But that's their reality...they used to be able to brag to recruits about some serious marquee matchups in conference every year, with Cincy being the lowest ranked of the "good games." Until Wichita, Cincy-UCONN is the marquee matchup of the AAC. The conference is better with the Shockers...but anyone but the most avid sports fan can't even tell you half the schools in the AAC.

As to the question about what to do with football? Drop it. I know it won't happen but football at UCONN is a money pit because most UCONN fans don't appear to care about football. 40,000 seat stadium that sold out 12 times in the last decade. The "competition" is selling out stadiums that are 50-150% larger than that and have the budget that reflects same. UCONN could probably be consistently competitive at FCS because that's what they are...an FCS football school trying to compete with teams that are out of their league.

I have a sneaky suspicion that their recruiting class wont be ranked in the 40s with that new assistant they got. They did lose some recruits with a staff shake up but its foolish to think those coaches at UConn wont be reeling in top talent in a normal year. Chillious is about as good as they get.

I also don't think they have to worry about marquee matchups. Let's be honest, only avid sports fans can tell you who is in every conference. There are a lot of banners in those gyms just like there are banners in our gyms (except for maybe Memphis, who had their taken away).

Good luck.

Well, with UConn looking at a large turnover entering this year, and no impact recruits, is it a stretch to question whether they are even a tournament team this upcoming season? They have no impact transfers or incoming freshmen, have lost Glen Miller and lost out on Makai Ashton-Langford (to Providence). Their schedule next year will include Syracuse, Oregon, Michigan State, Arizona and Auburn, including Wichita State (twice), Cincinnati (twice), Temple (twice), Tulsa (twice) and SMU. Those will all be tough games for them to win with, with such a new roster. Sure, you still have ECU (twice), Tulane (once) and USF (once), and a few more buy games, but, if the AAC, again doesn't get more than 4 teams in the tournament, it will be hard for UConn to be one of those teams.

If UConn misses again next year, would that be enough to confirm this trend, or simply just create a perception where it is a down period (probably culminating with a change with Ollie)?