Article on what's wrong with UConn recruiting

[Bill Marsh]

UConn's struggles with recruiting should not be surprising. They play in a national non-power conference. No one in the Northeast cares about playing teams in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Florida, Louisiana, Tennessee, et al. When they were in the Big East, they were able to use the regionality of the conference, and the geographic rivals, to incite excitement and intrigue for all of the teams. No matter how you cut it, Houston, SMU, Tulane, ECU, Tulsa, USF, and UCF doesn't inspire excitement for fans or recruits. Even if you give it ten years, it won't be able to sell.

UConn very much needs the Big East brand to rebound and get back to elite status. Sadly, it appears they have sold their soul for the unlikely chance for football to carry them into a power conference. That, too, doesn't look likely anytime in the near future.

In the meantime, we shall enjoy our successful and strong basketball conference. Let that other one figure out a new marketing slogan or another way to get included in the club.

"News of my demise has been greatly exaggerated." - Mark Twain

No doubt that UConn had a bad year, but how do we explain the fact hat they had a top 10 recruiting class just a year ago?

[MullinMayhem]

UConn's struggles with recruiting should not be surprising. They play in a national non-power conference. No one in the Northeast cares about playing teams in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Florida, Louisiana, Tennessee, et al. When they were in the Big East, they were able to use the regionality of the conference, and the geographic rivals, to incite excitement and intrigue for all of the teams. No matter how you cut it, Houston, SMU, Tulane, ECU, Tulsa, USF, and UCF doesn't inspire excitement for fans or recruits. Even if you give it ten years, it won't be able to sell.

UConn very much needs the Big East brand to rebound and get back to elite status. Sadly, it appears they have sold their soul for the unlikely chance for football to carry them into a power conference. That, too, doesn't look likely anytime in the near future.

In the meantime, we shall enjoy our successful and strong basketball conference. Let that other one figure out a new marketing slogan or another way to get included in the club.

"News of my demise has been greatly exaggerated." - Mark Twain

No doubt that UConn had a bad year, but how do we explain the fact hat they had a top 10 recruiting class just a year ago?

I think it's more than just a bad year. Hasn't UConn finished middle of the pack in the AAC several years now? The fact that they had a top 10 class a year ago can be explained by this: the closer UConn was to the Big East era, the better they were. If you are a winning program and then you drop off a few years, you will still get your share of recruits from the leftover prestige fresh in their heads, but eventually it drops off completely if you don't keep winning. What we're seeing with UConn is the effect of prioritizing football which sacrificed their basketball program. The AAC is a prestige drain for basketball. Some will say anything makes sense if you have the chance to make more money, but UConn is finding out the hard way that the school-conference fit actually does matter to an extent. There's a sort of poetic justice about that...in a greedy world sometimes greed backfires. UConn fit perfectly in the Big East geographically and had its choice of tri-state recruits all while winning constantly at a high level. They tried to fix something that was not broken and they got burned. That is why their recruiting dropped off...my suspicion is that Ollie was never a great coach, he had the right players leftover from the Big East days and rode the momentum. That's not to take all credit from Ollie, he's a decent coach but certainly not a great one and certainly should not be given all the credit for the championship their first year in the AAC. I figured UConn would go into a downward spiral after joining the AAC, but I don't think anyone could have expected how rapidly it's happening. Geographic fit matters, prestige matters, and conference brand matters. Other programs in conference matter. That has been made clear if you look at the recruiting results and school-conference fit.

[ConnersvilleBulldog]

UConn's recruiting class ranking in the 5 years since moving to the AAC:

2017: 76
2016: 8
2015: 39
2014: 44
2013: 40

The top 10 class is more of an outlier now, than a norm.

[Savannah Jay]

UConn's recruiting class ranking in the 5 years since moving to the AAC:

2017: 76
2016: 8
2015: 39
2014: 44
2013: 40

The top 10 class is more of an outlier now, than a norm.

And given length of recruiting cycles, the success in 2016 can be tied pretty directly to the 2014 Natty. I think the 76 ranking may become the norm because, let's face it, most fans (and top level recruits) probably couldn't name half the teams in the AAC. The best program in the conference now is the one they just took from another mid major.

EDIT: Recruiting cycles usually take years; on rare occasion, a top 20 recruit will commit to a university that has never been mentioned by that recruit, his family, recruiting analysts, or really anyone associated with the kid. Ahem.

[Bill Marsh]

UConn's recruiting class ranking in the 5 years since moving to the AAC:

2017: 76
2016: 8
2015: 39
2014: 44
2013: 40

The top 10 class is more of an outlier now, than a norm.

So is #76.

Are you saying that top 40 recruiting classes are a bad thing? And let's not forget that they got some quality transfers during those years as well.

[EMT]

UConn's recruiting class ranking in the 5 years since moving to the AAC:

2017: 76
2016: 8
2015: 39
2014: 44
2013: 40

The top 10 class is more of an outlier now, than a norm.

So is #76.

Are you saying that top 40 recruiting classes are a bad thing? And let's not forget that they got some quality transfers during those years as well.

The transfers out hurt as well. In UConn's defense on 2017, they had MAL and stopped looking for PGs.... That killed their rating.

[GumbyDamnit!]

This is a BE board and as expected there lies an inherent bias that sits as a undercurrent to every discussion. We are loyal to our brand and for good reason. But in this case I don't think we can look at 4 years of data and make any definitive projections about a program's future. I think it would be similar to looking at G'town since the oBE broke apart and saying that the nBE is the cause of their recent issues, and they will continue to trend down. None of us would agree with that sentiment.

Now there are trends that should trouble UCONN...1). No natural rivalries; 2). Underwhelming support for the conference; 3). Lack of conference-wide post-season success; 4). Budget drag of FB; etc. But they have 4 NC's, or as much as our entire conference combined. One rogue run in the tourney and those NC's are again front and center. It's something none of us can match. We need to remember that before we start writing their obituary and patting ourselves on the back for our fledgling success as a "new" BB conf power.

I, for one, miss the rivalry and hope they can someday find their way back to the conference. If it takes them (and their fans) gulping down some humble pie prior to it, I hope it happens. It would make us a better conference.

[MullinMayhem]

UConn fans remind me of a kid born with a silver spoon, inheriting millions from his father and ultimately lose their fortune due to bad investments. They are then forced to get a regular 9-5 job and complain since they are used to the good ol' days where things came easy and they had it made. They were spoiled rotten in the Big East era and now that it's gone, they still have Big East era expectations. Seeing some of their fans still expecting Final Four's and championships on a regular basis really gives insight on that. There are tons of delusional fans on their forum...they are unable to realize that UConn can be broken into 2 major eras: the Big East era and the AAC era. Their Big East era ended right after they won their most recent championship on the last breaths of Calhoun's players. They suffered huge downgrades in both conference and head coach. What's really interesting is even if the ACC takes a look at them in years to come, their brand may be so diminished they don't even want their basketball.

[Bill Marsh]

"News of my demise has been greatly exaggerated." - Mark Twain

No doubt that UConn had a bad year, but how do we explain the fact hat they had a top 10 recruiting class just a year ago?

I think it's more than just a bad year. Hasn't UConn finished middle of the pack in the AAC several years now?

Yes, they finished 5th or 6th in the regular season each of the last 3 years. But the top 5 or 6 teams in that conference have not been the problem. They've been competitive. It's the bottom of the conference that's the problem.

Now for the rest of the story . . .

FACT #1: UConn finished 3rd & won the NC in 2014
FACT #2: UConn went to the finals of the conference tournament 3 straight years.
FACT #3: UConn won the AAC championship in 2016

It really isn't as simple as saying they "finished middle of the pack for several years. Factoring in the postseason, they've been better than that except for last year.

The fact that they had a top 10 class a year ago can be explained by this: the closer UConn was to the Big East era, the better they were.

I'm not following your logic here. Their recruiting was not better the closer they were to the BE era.

2014 - 44
2015 - 39
2016 - 8
2017 - 76

In other words, their recruiting improved each year they were in the AAC except last year.

If you are a winning program and then you drop off a few years,

But they haven't dropped off for a few years. They've continued to be a winning program since they left the Big East except for last year

you will still get your share of recruits from the leftover prestige fresh in their heads, but eventually it drops off completely if you don't keep winning. What we're seeing with UConn is the effect of prioritizing football which sacrificed their basketball program. The AAC is a prestige drain for basketball.

If that's the case, how do we explain the fact that Memphis continued to win even after Louisville and the rest left CUSA for the Big East back in 2005? How do we explain the Gonzaga's continuing success while playing in a crap conference? Or Wichita State, VCU, George Mason, or Butler (in the Horizon)? How do we explain the ongoing struggles of DePaul, St John's, and Georgetown in the prestigious Big East? Your theory is a vast oversimplification.

Some will say anything makes sense if you have the chance to make more money,

This is a common misperception. Starting in the '90's, UConn set a goal to be a major national research university with their UConn 2000 initiative. Before that, it was a run down campus which was considered a safety school by the top students graduating from Connecticut's high schools. Within a decade, their success with this initiative was reflected by their inclusion in Greene's "Public Ivies", which was published in the early 2000's. They have continued to build their research base since then, most notably with their partnership on the human genome project with Jackson Labs 5 years ago - project which included a multi-million construction project on their medical campus.

Th bottom line is that for better or worse the UConn leadership decided that the formula to transform themselves into a nationally recognized state flagship included having an athletic program that looked like other such flagships from the Big Ten, PAC 12, etc. That's the real motivation. I'm sure the money is part of it, but the motivating force was a total University identity, not an isolated athletic initiative

but UConn is finding out the hard way that the school-conference fit actually does matter to an extent.

They found all this out as the result of one losing season? They were conference champions and won a game in the NCAA tournament the year before. Hardly a program in decline.

There's a sort of poetic justice about that...in a greedy world sometimes greed backfires. UConn fit perfectly in the Big East geographically and had its choice of tri-state recruits all while winning constantly at a high level. They tried to fix something that was not broken and they got burned. That is why their recruiting dropped off...

You're entitled to your preference, but UConn is also entitled to theirs.

my suspicion is that Ollie was never a great coach, he had the right players leftover from the Big East days and rode the momentum.

This is simply not true. The momentum had already been broken, but not by Ollie. It was broken by Calhoun.

2011- National Championship
2012 - Mediocre Season
2012 - UConn is penalized for recruiting violations with a postseason suspension for 2013
2012 - 4 starters leave, 2 to the NBA and 2 transfer out.
2012 - Napier and Boatright also consider transferring but Ollie re-recruits them, convincing them to stay
2013 - Ollie coaches the remnants of the decimated 2011-12 team to a 20-win season.
2013 - A likely NCAA tournament team serves its postseason suspension.
2014 - Ollie does one of the great coaching jobs in tournament, winning the national championship over vastly more talented Kentucky and Florida teams.

The notion that Calhoun left Ollie "the right players" is simply not true. Calhoun had both Napier and Boatright in his 2012 lineup and. Did nothing with them. The rest of the championship roster were either Calhoun bench players or new recruits.

That's not to take all credit from Ollie,

That's exactly what you're doing.

he's a decent coach but certainly not a great one and certainly should not be given all the credit for the championship their first year in the AAC.

Of course he gets all the credit. It happened on his watch with players he recruited either as an assistant when he was the chief recruiter or as head coach. It happened as a rresult of his coaching and player development. He did not inherit a championship roster. Four starters from the championship team were long gone. He completely rebuilt the team. It was his team, not Calhoun's.

I figured UConn would go into a downward spiral after joining the AAC, but I don't think anyone could have expected how rapidly it's happening.

One losing season is "a downward spiral"?

Geographic fit matters, prestige matters, and conference brand matters. Other programs in conference matter.

I agree. I have hated the AAC since day one,and it has only been made worse for UConn by the decisions to add Tulsa and Wichita State.

That has been made clear if you look at the recruiting results and school-conference fit.

As much as I agree re the poor school-conference fit, one bad recruiting season doesn't make a trend. They continued to be involved with top recruits this year but came in 2nd. It happens to all schools. They were particularly hurt by the late change of heart by Ashton-Langford because his early signing closed them out of other recruits at that position.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, but I take exception with your presentation of the facts, which I find to be way off from what are the actual facts.

[ConnersvilleBulldog]

UConn's recruiting class ranking in the 5 years since moving to the AAC:

2017: 76
2016: 8
2015: 39
2014: 44
2013: 40

The top 10 class is more of an outlier now, than a norm.

So is #76.

Are you saying that top 40 recruiting classes are a bad thing? And let's not forget that they got some quality transfers during those years as well.

No, they aren't terrible. But considering the last 5 seasons in the Big East, UConn was pulling in Top 15 classes with #33 being their worst class, it shows that they are trending downward.