Um, look at the program before Willard and now after Willard.
Of course Willard was the best since PJ, and your point is?? We haven't had any good ones since PJ. That's like saying you're dating the least ugly of all the ugly girls at the dance.
You have low expectations then. To live the rest of your life without even a sniff of a Sweet 16. It's all about the dance, I don't see how this is debatable. THINK SMALL AT SETON HALL. Let me address each though:
Would you sign up for no Sweet 16 and only one second round appearance for the next 12 years? Not me. I'm with NYShoreguy on this. Marginal by every measurement.
I said that Willard was exactly what we needed after the Bobby debacle. But wow, if you'd sign up for that in perpetuity, I'm starting to realize why we are never successful. This reminds me of a person who has been starved for years and is given McDonalds and they think they're eating well. Wow. Sad commentary here.
Show me one poster who compared Willard to PJ. Show me.
Not at all. Some coaches are able to do only so much with a given level of resources, while others are able to do much more. Pretty simple. Willard had 12 years to show us what he could do and he did. We're all thankful he built back the program to some level of respectability after the mess it was in, but common agreement on this board at that time considered that to be his ceiling here at SHU and pretty much everyone was wanting to move on from him.
Sad commentary. THINK SMALL AT SETON HALL. And I never said I expect to be a "top program" like a blue blood, but there's no reason we can't expect more than marginal. We should be competitive and have occasional tournament runs.
It’s 45 years of relevant history that tells you our realistic expectations. We’ve had 3 successful eras in that entire time.
I'd sign up for that in a heartbeat obviously, that's not what I said and that's not what we were for most of Willard's tenure.
People got all triggered when someone said Willard was marginal, which he was. I guess they despise reality.
Agree with you on this. In the last 50 years, HALF A CENTURY, we have had only two periods of sustained success. They both lasted about seven years. When those two coaches left, the bottom fell out. With all due respect to those who have different opinion maybe it’s because SHU is and always has been the toughest job in the BE and is and aways has been the lowest resourced team in the BE. Both those guys overcame a lot to achieve the success they had and nobody comes close to PJ.
And a bonus cool thing is he's contributing on a team that is winning (9-5, 4th in the east)
www.espn.com
Did they also know what they were doing with the terrible Kyle Neptune hire? And don't blame Jay for that, the school went along and Jay undoubtedly also had significant say in the Willard hire. I wonder about some posters.
www.raptorsrepublic.com
I think 2018 when they lost Desi from the wet court from the ice at Providence was huge. If he didn't get hurt in a way he never should have, the team would have had a better seed and run in the dance. Desi was hobbled when he did return.
I know Dan feels otherwise and there may have been some off the court issues but can’t rely on one guy like Khadeen to carry a team down the stretch of of a season and into the tournament. We had to start an unproven freshman, Cale, against Kansas who wasn’t ready. After Carrington missed two FTs Cale missed an assignment and gave up a wide open 3 at the end of the first half and we went into the locker room down five rather than two. Sure a little thing and Carrington exploded in the 2nd half but not having Desi to get his 18+ points really hurt in that game and also the loss to Butler in the BET that probably cost us a seed line.
I don't think Cale started the Kansas game. It was Desi's first start back. We were playing really well with Cale starting for that stretch of games and I always felt starting Desi against Kansas took us out of our rhythm. Cale was playing a really good complimentary role for us and Desi tried to do too much at the beginning of the game.
Desi was real good but all the time the core was together wore cracks in the team and imo was a reason we didnt reach as high as expected.
You’re right, Desi started but only scored 5 points and was ineffective, hence Cale being on the floor more than he should have been. Not knocking Cale just saying not having Desi late in the season was a big loss.
www.thestar.com
www.si.com
