Waters Revisited

[Mr Magoo_rivals90743]

Right, which is why there is so much parity now. Remember this wasn’t created as a Waters Pikiell comparison thread this was revisiting Waters. @S_Janowski started the comparison.

Waters was more stuck with what came in than coaches now who can retool roster very quickly.

I understand what you are saying regarding his disadvantage of his first few years and the ability to re-tool quickly.

You are correct, I had the issue with the comparison to Pike (perhaps not your original point). The topic drifted and I’m only saying that all of the teams that pike is competing with can re-tool equally as quick.

As you’ve said, Waters was stuck with his initial roster. His downfall was that he couldn’t recruit to save his life.

 

[RUsojo]

You literally asked in the OP “how does top 68 team success match up to the history of RU coaches?”

Gtfo out of here that this thread wasn’t mean to compare Waters to Pikiell.

You’re so full of it haha.

You would be a much better poster if you just came out and stated things directly, instead of always being so passive/aggressive.

The irony is you making up my intentions and then labeling what you’ve created to then be passive aggressive, is just you being aggressive lol

 

[S_Janowski]

The irony is you making up my intentions and than labeling what you’ve created passive aggressive, is youre just being aggressive lol

Which coaches did you expect everyone to compare Waters and success with the field of 68 to then, if it wasn’t Pikiell?

I’m really curious.

- Bannon?
- Rice?
- Jordan?
- Stringer?
- Grentz?
- Jay Wright?
- Schiano?
- Ash?
-

 

[RUsojo]

Which coaches did you expect everyone to compare Waters and success with the field of 68 to then, if it wasn’t Pikiell?

I’m really curious.

- Bannon?
- Rice?
- Jordan?
- Stringer?
- Grentz?
- Jay Wright?
- Schiano?
- Ash?
-

Every RU coaches first 3 seasons is what the OP implies. Which should be pointed out was a secondary point to was Waters better to an we realized.

 

[S_Janowski]

Every RU coaches first 3 seasons is what the OP implies. Which should be pointed out was a secondary point to was Waters better to an we realized.

Who are the coaches for their first 3 seasons would this OP would actually apply to, outside of Pikiell?

 

[RUsojo]

Who are the coaches for their first 3 seasons would this OP would actually apply to, outside of Pikiell?

Every RU coaches first 3 seasons is what the OP implies. Which should be pointed out was a secondary point to was Waters better to an we realized.

 

[mugrat86]

You literally asked in the OP “how does top 68 team success match up to the history of RU coaches?”

Gtfo out of here that this thread wasn’t mean to compare Waters to Pikiell.

You’re so full of it haha.

You would be a much better poster if you just came out and stated things directly, instead of always being so passive/aggressive.

I think Sojo and Kyk cheered when watching selection Sunday show

 

[wheezer]

Horrible road records

Fans of that time really get this, more recent fans might just be looking at the overall records and as I said, the one really good record was inflated by home NIT games
We constantly came up short in league road games. It was frustrating for sure

Pike is starting to get it done and he has quality recruits listening and signing

Just a different atmosphere

 

[S_Janowski]

Every RU coaches first 3 seasons is what the OP implies. Which should be pointed out was a secondary point to was Waters better to an we realized.

@RUsojo I’m asking which coaches this OP would actually apply to outside of Pikiell?

Surely there’s no point in wasting energy discussing guys like Fred Hill, Mike Rice, Eddie Jordan as it relates to the OP.

 

[RUsojo]

@RUsojo I’m asking which coaches this OP would actually apply to outside of Pikiell?

Surely there’s no point in wasting energy discussing guys like Fred Hill, Mike Rice, Eddie Jordan as it relates to the OP.

Every RU coaches first 3 seasons is what the OP implies. Which should be pointed out was a secondary point to was Waters better to an we realized.

 

[S_Janowski]

Haha ok

 

[MADHAT1]

Grad transfers could not play right away when Waters took the job IIRC. @bac2therac @S_Janowski do you know off hand when that started?

@cm_13

If Grad transfers couldn't start for Rutgers when Waters was HC then they couldn't start for RU's competition as well.
That probably meant when recruiting transfers Waters might not have had an edge to get the good ones, just like his HS player recruiting edge wasn't the greatest in bringing in talent

Waters even in an era that had grad transfers eligible to start right away probably would have the same results as the HS talent that he was bringing in.
And that wasn't the best of the best or the better ones, the ones that come were 2nd tier just a step below what's needed to be a constant winner with the right coaching.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

This thread and another one floating out there like it are jokes.

The advantages and disadvantages of the transfer portal changes are a relative wash. It’s not like we’ve feasted on the portal.

But the most ridiculous comment is the one about how NIL has given RU this huge edge. KYK seems to be taking the position that RU is a bag of money and any coach at RU could now rake in unlimited 4 and 5 star recruits on demand. Ok sure. We’re suddenly a top 10 school for funding NIL deals. Money is no object for us and wouldn’t be no matter who we plug in at coach right? Ha.

 

[RUsojo]

This thread and another one floating out there like it are jokes.

The advantages and disadvantages of the transfer portal changes are a relative wash. It’s not like we’ve feasted on the portal.

But the most ridiculous comment is the one about how NIL has given RU this huge edge. KYK seems to be taking the position that RU is a bag of money and any coach at RU could now rake in unlimited 4 and 5 star recruits on demand. Ok sure. We’re suddenly a top 10 school for funding NIL deals. Money is no object for us and wouldn’t be no matter who we plug in at coach right? Ha.

How is the transfer portal a wash? How are the transfers rules in general a wash? They didn’t exist in the Waters era.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

How is the transfer portal a wash? How are the transfers rules in general a wash? They didn’t exist in the Waters era.

Because the transfer portal is available to every other team just the same as Rutgers. It can hurt you on a relative basis or help you. There’s zero evidence, or reason to believe based on Waters recruiting patterns that it would’ve helped him based on the competition. He was never a good recruiter. Why would he have done better recruiting kids in the portal to come to RU over, say Wisconsin? It’s a net neutral unless you have evidence to support otherwise which you can’t possibly have.

 

[MADHAT1]

How is the transfer portal a wash? How are the transfers rules in general a wash? They didn’t exist in the Waters era.

iT's a wash because the rules today for Rutgers are the same for every program competing in the same division.
Just like the rules back in Waters era applied to all programs.
The rules might change, but all programs are effected by them equally.
Simply out, as for the rules :
What's good for the goose (Pikiell)
is good for the gander (Waters)

 

[RUsojo]

Because the transfer portal is available to every other team just the same as Rutgers. It can hurt you on a relative basis or help you. There’s zero evidence, or reason to believe based on Waters recruiting patterns that it would’ve helped him based on the competition. He was never a good recruiter. Why would he have done better recruiting kids in the portal to come to RU over, say Wisconsin? It’s a net neutral unless you have evidence to support otherwise which you can’t possibly have.

iT's a wash because the rules today for Rutgers are the same for every program competing in the same division.
Just like the rules back in Waters era applied to all programs.
The rules might change, but all programs are effected by them equally.
Simply out, as for the rules :
What's good for the goose (Pikiell)
is good for the gander (Waters)

You guys are making the mistake of comparing waters and Pike.

Per Jay Wright grad transfers, the portal, and NIL (and 6th year players) have creates more parity than ever, narrowing margins that use to be wide based on high school recruiting advantages being larger what exists today.

Grad transfers and portal is about filling holes and gaps from high school recruiting.

Of course waters would’ve missed on top transfer targets that other teams coveted (like we happen with our team today which is neither here nor there) but he would be able to add and retool the roster to improve it which has shown to be very effective for below average and average high major teams.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

You guys are making the mistake of comparing waters and Pike.

Per Jay Wright grad transfers, the portal, and NIL (and 6th year players) have creates more parity than ever, narrowing margins that use to be wide based on high school recruiting advantages being larger what exists today.

Grad transfers and portal is about filling holes and gaps from high school recruiting.

Of course waters would’ve missed on top transfer targets that other teams coveted (like we happen with our team today which is neither here nor there) but he would be able to add and retool the roster to improve it which has shown to be very effective for below average and average high major teams.

I’m not seeing how the so called parity your talking about would be relevant to Rutgers position then or now. The parity with NIL is about it no longer being the case that a school like Miami can’t buy players despite being less attractive than a UK or UNC. If money is no object and you can outbid everyone, that can be a great equalizer. That’s not our situation at Rutgers. We’re not getting players because we’re out bidding. We’re simply coming up with the money to avoid losing players we are competing for because we can’t match the pay of our competitors. These are 2 very different things. The Ace Baileys of his era would not have been interested in playing for Waters unless we were paying significantly more than the blue bloods could which is not the case.

I personally think the transfer portal would’ve hurt waters more than it would help him. He was good at developing players but not enough so to get over the hump because his recruiting wasn’t good. I think his developed players would’ve used the portal to head for the races without the sit out rule. And I don’t think he’d do that well replacing them with new portal kids.

 

[GoodOl'Rutgers]

My summary of Waters is this:

What he promised to bring.. 96x40.. full court pressure for 40 minutes.. transition game offense... Waters pressure.

He NEVER made an effort to show that. Not once.

He did well with the previous coach's players... but did not seem to do the work to get his own. Even from the first moment when he stayed with his.. Kent State? team through their NC AA appearance rather than getting to work. And even left the team during the season to go back for some dinner honoring them.. getting stuck in a snowstorm and allowing his assistant to account for an upset win over Pitt... which earn him the job.

Waters got Wally Pipped for a rubber chicken dinner.

For what it's worth, I think he did well. He could coach. His strength program was important in those big games. I don't think he could manage a D1 basketball team.

It is funny OP mentions how strong the Big East was then when it wasn't as good as the Big Ten then.. nor now.

Waters was at RU 2001-2006.. here are teh Final Fours from those years...

2001 Duke Arizona Maryland Michigan State
2002 Maryland Indiana Kansas Oklahoma
2003 Syracuse Kansas Marquette Texas
2004 UCONN GTech Duke Oklahoma
2005 UNC Illinois Louisville Michigan State
2006 Florida UCLA George Mason LSU

Big Ten 4 appearances in FinalFour by then-BigTen teams
Big East 2 appearances.. but two championships

Pike has OWNED perennial powers, Indiana and Purdue.. for teh most part. Waters would get some big wins.. but those were always surprises.. big upsets.

Pike is objectively better.. but his teams and conference and facilities are better than what Waters had.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

This thread is starting to really annoy me. Outperforming with someone else’s recruits then struggling to bring in your own kids. That’s Water’s legacy.

Pike outperformed with what he had in the early years - the program was torn to shreds. We nearly doubled our win total. But he had nothing. He made his NCAA run with all his own kids that he brought in. None of them were these high profile kids that you’d say we could’ve never gotten with the facilities we had back then. Please. Pike hit gold with Geo, Caleb, RHJ, MJ, etc. He brought in his own kid from Stonybrook to supplement. And JY was only a stud at RU. Nowhere else. I’m not seeing any data that screams - oh if Waters had what todays RU program offers he’d surely shine here. It’s a ridiculous notion.

 

[dpwhite]

If we aren't talking about comparing to Pikes, I actually think Waters biggest issues were:

-Not winning on the road
-Ridiculous Chemistry Issues every other year
-Inman injury

His recruiting wasn't stellar, but it was fine: Douby, Webb, Inman, Farmer, Hill were highlights... but he couldn't get a road win. Cortez Davis dropped out. Harry Good punched Adrian Hill. Shields and Douby couldn't get along, if I remember correctly... and then Inman got a huge injury in Douby's fantastic year, so he couldn't develop into Douby's sidekick... and then they lost to St. John's at home, Waters got caught in a blizzard, Hill was a shiny new toy and Mulcahy was more focused on football etc etc...

 

[NewJerseyHawk]

Certain threads are worth overlooking and missing altogether, the agenda masked by a coach here pver 20 years ago, is great stuff.

And the field for Power 5 teams is not expanded to 68, it's still really 66 or 64. It adds 2 more small conference championship teams, so FDU can play TX Southern and Texas A&M CC can play someone else. Those 4 teams as league champs clog up the field as 16 seeds of a total of 64 years ago. There is nothing different about the way RU would have made or not made the field in the Pike era.

 

[bac2therac]

Remember we had students who held up fire Waters signs either in the st Johns? or Providence games

 

[RUsojo]

Remember we had students who held up fire Waters signs either in the st Johns? or Providence games

Forgot about that. Our fans have certainly had their issues in the past although I was still surprised to hear Hobbs call out the fans particular the 100 level older fans recently.

 

[dpwhite]

Forgot about that. Our fans have certainly had their issues in the past although I was still surprised to hear Hobbs call out the fans particular the 100 level older fans recently.

He wasn't calling them out. If we are really taking his comment that he hopes fans stand on their own in the future instead of him having to walk down the sideline and get them to stand at a tipoff as a shot at fans, we are really thin skinned.

 

[RUsojo]

He wasn't calling them out. If we are really taking his comment that he hopes fans stand on their own in the future instead of him having to walk down the sideline and get them to stand at a tipoff as a shot at fans, we are really thin skinned.

I don’t think it has anything to do with being thin-skinned. Recognizing Hobbs issue with it does not have to be a personal attack.

I’m not sure what else you can call it when someone is literally going around the place calling for people to stand and then says it again in public to a forum fans are the only audience.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Certain threads are worth overlooking and missing altogether, the agenda masked by a coach here pver 20 years ago, is great stuff.

And the field for Power 5 teams is not expanded to 68, it's still really 66 or 64. It adds 2 more small conference championship teams, so FDU can play TX Southern and Texas A&M CC can play someone else. Those 4 teams as league champs clog up the field as 16 seeds of a total of 64 years ago. There is nothing different about the way RU would have made or not made the field in the Pike era.

Excellent point that I didn’t think of. More auto bids absolutely makes the expanded field a wash too.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

If we aren't talking about comparing to Pikes, I actually think Waters biggest issues were:

-Not winning on the road
-Ridiculous Chemistry Issues every other year
-Inman injury

His recruiting wasn't stellar, but it was fine: Douby, Webb, Inman, Farmer, Hill were highlights... but he couldn't get a road win. Cortez Davis dropped out. Harry Good punched Adrian Hill. Shields and Douby couldn't get along, if I remember correctly... and then Inman got a huge injury in Douby's fantastic year, so he couldn't develop into Douby's sidekick... and then they lost to St. John's at home, Waters got caught in a blizzard, Hill was a shiny new toy and Mulcahy was more focused on football etc etc...

I forgot about the chemistry issues. No way to know for sure, but yet another blow against the argument that the transfer portal would’ve boosted Waters success. Chemistry is the single biggest obstacle with integrating portal kids.

I don’t think Waters was “awful”. He’s certainly above average when it comes to the history of RU basketball coaches. We’ve had some real busts. The point is there is no reason whatsoever for anyone to be starting a string about how one of our prior coaches who didn’t work out here would be able to waltz in and flourish at RU now. It’s a ridiculous point. You could take any coach that had success at one school but didn’t work out at their next stop and say things could have been different “IF”. What does that mean? We were in a seemingly impossible situation and Pike came in and changed the whole trajectory of the program. At current juncture - this string is simply a slap in Pike’s face. Completely unwarranted.

 

[RUsojo]

I forgot about the chemistry issues. No way to know for sure, but yet another blow against the argument that the transfer portal would’ve boosted Waters success. Chemistry is the single biggest obstacle with integrating portal kids.

I don’t think Waters was “awful”. He’s certainly above average when it comes to the history of RU basketball coaches. We’ve had some real busts. The point is there is no reason whatsoever for anyone to be starting a string about how one of our prior coaches who didn’t work out here would be able to waltz in and flourish at RU now. It’s a ridiculous point. You could take any coach that had success at one school but didn’t work out at their next stop and say things could have been different “IF”. What does that mean? We were in a seemingly impossible situation and Pike came in and changed the whole trajectory of the program. At current juncture - this string is simply a slap in Pike’s face. Completely unwarranted.

Actually, this is a great argument supporting Waters challenge not having the portal, not the other way around.

Portal couldve allowed him to cut ties with a player not meshing without the fear of significantly reducing the quality of your team because you can find a quick replacement.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Actually, this is a great argument supporting Waters challenge not having the portal, not the other way around.

Portal couldve allowed him to cut ties with a player not meshing without the fear of significantly reducing the quality of your team because you can find a quick replacement.

Use of the portal rarely improves chemistry. It’s a huge challenge to manage playing time expectations which is typically the reason kids enter via the portal. Could it happen. Sure - Texas did a good job integrating Carr who was not a team player at all on Minny. That’s more an exception than rule though. Certainly portal integration on average creates more chemistry concerns than less.

Bottom line - This whole thread is an underhanded jab trying to marginalize Pike’s success thus far. Very uncalled for and any basis you could have is grasping at major straws.

 

[RUsojo]

Use of the portal rarely improves chemistry. It’s a huge challenge to manage playing time expectations which is typically the reason kids enter via the portal. Could it happen. Sure - Texas did a good job integrating Carr who was not a team player at all on Minny. That’s more an exception than rule though. Certainly portal integration on average creates more chemistry concerns than less.

Bottom line - This whole thread is an underhanded jab trying to marginalize Pike’s success thus far. Very uncalled for and any basis you could have is grasping at major straws.

I don’t agree with this at all. What proof exists here? Rutgers alone has had more positive chemistry impacts than negative.

There’s always two sides to every coin but I think you’re sort of actively looking for some definitively negative items here where they don’t definitively exist. .02

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

I don’t agree with this at all. What proof exists here? Rutgers alone has had more positive chemistry impacts than negative.

There’s always two sides to every coin but I think you’re sort of actively looking for some definitively negative items here where they don’t definitively exist. .02

I’m not actively looking for anything. I’d never start a thread to try to make a point that cannot be proven one way or the other.

That’s the point - it’s dumb. There’s zero basis one way or the other to even make a case that a great coach from the past would surpass Pike’s success in todays environment - let alone a prior coach that didn’t work out.

But it’s an accurate statement that the top question mark most people think of with integrating portal kids is chemistry - will they fit in / what are their expectations. Nobody thinks of the portal as a way to fix chemistry issues. It’s a means of quickly upgrading talent but clearly comes with a risk of navigating chemistry issues. How can you deny this? I even threw you a bone and provided a great example conceding there are surely examples where it works out very well but come on man.

 

[RUsojo]

I’m not actively looking for anything. I’d never start a thread to try to make a point that cannot be proven one way or the other.

That’s the point - it’s dumb. There’s zero basis one way or the other to even make a case that a great coach from the past would surpass Pike’s success in todays environment - let alone a prior coach that didn’t work out.

But it’s an accurate statement that the top question mark most people think of with integrating portal kids is chemistry - will they fit in / what are their expectations. Nobody thinks of the portal as a way to fix chemistry issues. It’s a means of quickly upgrading talent but clearly comes with a risk of navigating chemistry issues. How can you deny this? I even threw you a bone and provided a great example conceding there are surely examples where it works out very well but come on man.

Not sure who said that was the point of the thread but surely it wasn’t me.

If chemistry issues were a significant issue you wouldn’t see so much portal movement. Seems like more of an old school cliche than significant operational challenge.

Also not sure why a potential new players expectations would be considered a chemistry risk but an existing players next year expectations would not be a chemistry risk. This is in fact typically the reason players leave - their playing expectations don’t align with the coaches.

 

[NickRU714]

As someone who was a student in attendance for the holy trinity:

• NIT semi final v. Iowa State
• NIT final v. Michigan
• "Snow game" v. Marquette

I will not stand for any slander against HC Waters or HC Hill.
They were great men and great coaches.

Note - any discussion of games not included in the above list will be dismissed and ignored.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Not sure who said that was the point of the thread but surely it wasn’t me.

If chemistry issues were a significant issue you wouldn’t see so much portal movement. Seems like more of an old school cliche than significant operational challenge.

Also not sure why a potential new players expectations would be considered a chemistry risk but an existing players next year expectations would not be a chemistry risk. This is in fact typically the reason players leave - their playing expectations don’t align with the coaches.

What was your point in this thread then? You point blank compare one coach to the other from completely different eras. Not sure how else it could be viewed.

Maybe it’s cliche but it’s still out there as a commonly believed narrative that portal kids may not always be team players. Perhaps it’s a myth, but there’s certainly no evidence supporting the counter argument that the portal is typically used as a tool to help address chemistry issues.

 

[RUsojo]

What was your point in this thread then? You point blank compare one coach to the other from completely different eras. Not sure how else it could be viewed.

Maybe it’s cliche but it’s still out there as a commonly believed narrative that portal kids may not always be team players. Perhaps it’s a myth, but there’s certainly no evidence supporting the counter argument that the portal is typically used as a tool to help address chemistry issues.

It was stated very plainly in the OP.

“Considering facilities, no portal, no NIL, etc, was he a better coach than we even realized? How does top 68 team success so quickly match up to the history of RU coaches?”

Being younger back then I don’t think I realized how well Waters did early on.

 

[wheezer]

It was stated very plainly in the OP.

“Considering facilities, no portal, no NIL, etc, was he a better coach than we even realized? How does top 68 team success so quickly match up to the history of RU coaches?”

Being younger back then I don’t think I realized how well Waters did early on.

At the time it felt like we were not going to get it done with him
There was little hope of us moving to the upper half of the league

 

[WC3n514993847FnwqZd@]

Waters was NOT a good guy. Lots of off court scandals that were covered up.

 

[RUsojo]

Waters was NOT a good guy. Lots of off court scandals that were covered up.

What kind?

 

[fluoxetine]

As has been mentioned before, there are only 2 more at-large spots, not 4. Also there are both more teams and more power conference teams now than there were in the mid 2000s. So field size seems like a wash if not actually more difficult now.

Regarding transfer rules, I can certainly see a good argument that no sit out transfers would be helpful for building a depleted roster. However, Pike did not have this advantage any more than Waters did in the initial build phase; no sit out transfers did not exist generally until post covid.