“Calhoun’s Recruits” | Page 2 | The Boneyard

“Calhoun’s Recruits”

August_West

Conscience do cost
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
51,392
Reaction Score
90,479
KenPom last year under Ollie, 179. Georgetown this year, 182. It's a fair comparison.
As for the American, it was always decent at the top, but the bottom half absolutely ruined any chance of getting good computer numbers.
meh computer numbers. Whatever. They are fine for discussion but at the end of the day you win or lose on the court. The day they start out handing trophies for KenPom is the day I stop watching hoops.

Computer numbers in AAC don't seem to hurt Houston the last few years.
 

August_West

Conscience do cost
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
51,392
Reaction Score
90,479
Completely disagree. The AAC (a mid-major conference) hurt our recruiting.
It absolutely did over the long haul and especially at the end. But at first it seemed we were overcoming it as we were pulling some serious recruits : Daniel Hamilton, Jalen Adams were top,top level recruits, and even as late as 2016-17 top 5 class which at the time via rankings was best class in UConn history. Plus we pulled the top of the transfer market at the time players like Larrier, Purvis, Sterling Gibbs and Shonn Miller. They were among the most coveted transfers in the country in their years.

in my opinion the AAC only truly hurt us recruiting AFTER we became a mess. Then it was salt in the wound. If we could've maintained a high level of play and stayed in top 25 and made the tourney year after year we could've overcome some of the AAC recruiting challenges.

Just like Houston proves the computer number AAC deal wrong, Memphis proves you can recruit to AAC.

You can win and recruit in that league but you have to be consistently at the very top. If you are going to be a middling team, then the AAC absolutely destroys you.

No matter what, we belonged in the BigEast. From day 1. But in summary I look at the time in the AAC as our failure (and Ollies) rather than the leagues fault.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
2,902
Reaction Score
12,326
Nobody needs my idiotic take but, like the rest of you, I still can’t get over it.

I’ve read quite a few posts lamenting that our expectations were too high for this group of players; 4/5 starters were mid-major level recruits and they simply had hard ceilings. All season long, though, I’ve been wondering what a Calhoun could have done with this group of kids. I honestly think he’d have won that last game by 20.

Remember that game in 2008 when UConn suspended Dyson/Wiggins and Calhoun took the severely depleted roster on the road to #8 Indiana and somehow got the W? Of course it’s not fair to compare anyone to Calhoun, but eking out wins like that are a large part of what makes a great coach.

I’m absolutely not defending Ollie, but anytime someone mention’s 2014, the most popular criticism is that he won it all with Calhoun’s recruits.

So my moronic unanswerable question is: Would Hurley have won with that 2014 roster? I really don’t think so. Dude probably would have started Brimah, Nolan and Olander together. (Joking, but you get my point)

I refuse to believe that this season was the best a strategic/reflective coach could have gotten out of these kids.

Anyway, it’s going to be a long off-season but we got this. We managed to stick it out after mind boggling losses to Tulsa in the AAC so this too shall pass. There’s still a lot to like about Hurley even if it is tough to see at the moment.
To be fair, I don't think Ollie would have won with that team if the tournament were run again. Luck is probably the biggest factor in every NCAA championship, and that year was an extreme example.
 

Inyatkin

Stairway to Seven
Joined
Jan 5, 2012
Messages
2,494
Reaction Score
9,781
meh computer numbers. Whatever. They are fine for discussion but at the end of the day you win or lose on the court. The day they start out handing trophies for KenPom is the day I stop watching hoops.

Computer numbers in AAC don't seem to hurt Houston the last few years.
It's not "handing out KenPom trophies," this stuff affects seeding. Historically top seeds do better than low seeds. Not that hard.
 
Joined
May 27, 2015
Messages
14,180
Reaction Score
95,447
meh computer numbers. Whatever. They are fine for discussion but at the end of the day you win or lose on the court. The day they start out handing trophies for KenPom is the day I stop watching hoops.

Computer numbers in AAC don't seem to hurt Houston the last few years.
They absolutely hurt Houston, there's a pretty clear outlier in how these teams were seeded

2FF426BE-DE88-4F6A-AAE4-BCF9CE3AA590.jpeg
 
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
3,771
Reaction Score
8,382
I don't fully agree. Some coaches have it in the post season and some don't. Rick Barnes is a perfect example. Dude cannot win when it counts. He's been coaching long enough that it's not random variation. The dude chokes.
Good call. Too bad there is no way to equal out the weight of a strong regular season (title) vs post. The drama is the only thing missing but it is sooo huge. How can you say any reg season champ was a disappointment if they got booted early from the dance? It shouldn’t be the case. But we ALL feel that.
 

August_West

Conscience do cost
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
51,392
Reaction Score
90,479
It's not "handing out KenPom trophies," this stuff affects seeding. Historically top seeds do better than low seeds. Not that hard.


Historically teams who are playing well win tourney games. Easy Peasy.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
16,467
Reaction Score
37,126
Great coaches win Tournament games, but come on, it's a little ridiculous to dismiss the role of luck.

Brimah was around a 50% FT shooter. If he misses that FT, we most likely have to foul and probably lose in regulation.

If he had missed the FT and we lost, because of basically a coin flip, would that be an indictment of Ollie as a coach?
 

Icehawk

TFG
Joined
Mar 6, 2020
Messages
767
Reaction Score
2,656
KenPom last year under Ollie, 179. Georgetown this year, 182. It's a fair comparison.
As for the American, it was always decent at the top, but the bottom half absolutely ruined any chance of getting good computer numbers.
How on earth are they as HIGH as 182?
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2020
Messages
3,679
Reaction Score
7,577
Nobody needs my idiotic take but, like the rest of you, I still can’t get over it.

I’ve read quite a few posts lamenting that our expectations were too high for this group of players; 4/5 starters were mid-major level recruits and they simply had hard ceilings. All season long, though, I’ve been wondering what a Calhoun could have done with this group of kids. I honestly think he’d have won that last game by 20.

Remember that game in 2008 when UConn suspended Dyson/Wiggins and Calhoun took the severely depleted roster on the road to #8 Indiana and somehow got the W? Of course it’s not fair to compare anyone to Calhoun, but eking out wins like that are a large part of what makes a great coach.

I’m absolutely not defending Ollie, but anytime someone mention’s 2014, the most popular criticism is that he won it all with Calhoun’s recruits.

So my moronic unanswerable question is: Would Hurley have won with that 2014 roster? I really don’t think so. Dude probably would have started Brimah, Nolan and Olander together. (Joking, but you get my point)

I refuse to believe that this season was the best a strategic/reflective coach could have gotten out of these kids.

Anyway, it’s going to be a long off-season but we got this. We managed to stick it out after mind boggling losses to Tulsa in the AAC so this too shall pass. There’s still a lot to like about Hurley even if it is tough to see at the moment.
If you’re saying Ollie was a better game coach than Hurley, then yes that’s true, his years as Calhoun’s assistant and his years in the NBA are a testament to all that experience. That said, it most definitely does not make him a better teacher of the game or a better recruiter. Hurley blows away Ollie in both of those departments and overall is a better coach with much more potential to improve his coaching abilities.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2015
Messages
21,136
Reaction Score
53,347
Great coaches win Tournament games, but come on, it's a little ridiculous to dismiss the role of luck.

Brimah was around a 50% FT shooter. If he misses that FT, we most likely have to foul and probably lose in regulation.

If he had missed the FT and we lost, because of basically a coin flip, would that be an indictment of Ollie as a coach?
Luck plays a factor in each individual game and season, but over the course of multiple years you can definitely identify patterns. It's too early to make a definitive judgement on Hurley. It is kind of nuts that he has two tournament wins and neither are here, though.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2018
Messages
2,100
Reaction Score
9,535
To be fair, I don't think Ollie would have won with that team if the tournament were run again. Luck is probably the biggest factor in every NCAA championship, and that year was an extreme example.
Love this. When do people start maybe putting some blame/credit on the players and acknowledge a little luck? So easy to blame the coach because we subconsciously feel it is easier to replace one guy than admit the pieces aren't there. In the Duke MSU game, coach K said in the press conference. "I didn't do anything in the last 5 minutes. These players took the game in their hands. It was all them" and you can tell that he wasn't just using coach speak. If he didn't qualify that, a fan could easily say "K coached them to the W" but it was luck and a bunch of 5 stars
 

StllH8L8ner

You’ll get nothing and like it!
Joined
Mar 22, 2020
Messages
2,156
Reaction Score
11,894
That slack is good for two more seasons.
Yup. I think we’re going to struggle next year a bit due to some inexperience. But the year after that there are zero excuses.
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
200
Reaction Score
451
The American was a bad conference man. There’s a reason everyone was screaming to join the big East. Those Christmas break games against Houston were in front of nobody. Tournament games in Hartford and Memphis? It was hard selling to kids to play in that conference.

That exodus was crazy too. Never saw anything like it from kids who were getting PT. Combine that with AG being hurt every year and the other injury bugs and he couldn’t catch a break. It’s water under the bridge at this point. It’s kind of bizarre how we talk about a coach that has as many national championships as Syracuse though.

Jim Calhoun was not coming back.

UConn would've been in the same predicament in the NBE that they were in the AAC. It would have been a mid-to-lower tier team.

Houston has blown up in the AAC. UConn had every opportunity to do the same. The AAC's brands are every bit as good as the brands that made up the NBE. The only difference was Nova went on a mini-run and buoyed the conference with that 1-team.

Being a "conference dependent" program is never a good thing.
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
200
Reaction Score
451
Completely disagree. The AAC (a mid-major conference) hurt our recruiting.

The NBE and AAC were non-P5 after the split. There was no difference there.

Villanova had some success and the others didn't really.

UConn was slated to play Nova's role in the American but the UConn program just hasn't been able to replace Calhoun.
 
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
200
Reaction Score
451
Computer numbers in AAC don't seem to hurt Houston the last few years.

This.

And of course these "tallest midget" basketball conference debates do nothing to increase the media deals for non-P5 leagues.
 
Joined
Nov 20, 2018
Messages
3,974
Reaction Score
13,891
The NBE and AAC were non-P5 after the split. There was no difference there.

Villanova had some success and the others didn't really.

UConn was slated to play Nova's role in the American but the UConn program just hasn't been able to replace Calhoun.
From top to bottom the NBE is better than the AAC, IMO, but everything else you stated is 100% on point.

I just never bought into this notion that the AAC failed UConn. I think UConn failed the AAC. I was looking for them to be like Memphis under John Calipari when Memphis was in Conference USA (or whatever conference Memphis was in) or Gonzaga in the WCC. If Jim Calhoun was 10 years younger, there is no doubt in my mind UConn basketball would have emulated the success of those 2 teams

Once there was that mass exodus of recruits from Ollie's team in 2017 the AAC hastened UConn's slump like roller skating downhill, but it was UConn that facilitated it's own slump/downfall. Once that happened, the AAC made getting high quality recruits more difficult. I think with Dan Hurley they would've ascended into a top 3 team in the AAC and eventually obtained the high level recruits, but by being in the NBE getting higher quality recruits is happening sooner.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
2,902
Reaction Score
12,326
Jim Calhoun was not coming back.

UConn would've been in the same predicament in the NBE that they were in the AAC. It would have been a mid-to-lower tier team.

Houston has blown up in the AAC. UConn had every opportunity to do the same. The AAC's brands are every bit as good as the brands that made up the NBE. The only difference was Nova went on a mini-run and buoyed the conference with that 1-team.

Being a "conference dependent" program is never a good thing.
Do you mean before or after the Big 12 exodus. If you mean before, you're wrong. If you mean after, you're WAY wrong.
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
4,516
Reaction Score
18,019
If you don’t think the AAC is somewhat to blame for what happened to the Men’s team then I don’t know what to tell you.

And please don’t give me Houston as an example. There is a huge difference between where Houston came from vs where UConn came from. Also doesn’t hurt they hired an excellent coach which we didn’t have.
 

August_West

Conscience do cost
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
51,392
Reaction Score
90,479
If you don’t think the AAC is somewhat to blame for what happened to the Men’s team then I don’t know what to tell you.

And please don’t give me Houston as an example. There is a huge difference between where Houston came from vs where UConn came from. Also doesn’t hurt they hired an excellent coach which we didn’t have.

AAC should be as pissed at UConn as we were at them. We were supposed to be their flagship. We all called ourselves their flagship. And then we came in and won a Natty in the first year of conference existence and WERE their flagship, and then took a steaming pile of crap over basketball and football for next 6 years. Huge difference? That's the difference. We crapped all over oursleves and Houston flourished in both sports.
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
4,516
Reaction Score
18,019
AAC should be as pissed at UConn as we were at them. We were supposed to be their flagship. We all called ourselves their flagship. And then we came in and won a Natty in the first year of conference existence and WERE their flagship, and then took a steaming pile of crap over basketball and football for next 6 years. Huge difference? That's the difference. We crapped all over oursleves and Houston flourished in both sports.
The conference sucked the life out of the program. How can you recruit kids to play at UConn in both football and basketball in basically southern conference? The answer is you don't. That's why we are no longer in the AAC.
 
Joined
Apr 23, 2015
Messages
1,190
Reaction Score
6,963
The conference sucked the life out of the program. How can you recruit kids to play at UConn in both football and basketball in basically southern conference? The answer is you don't. That's why we are no longer in the AAC.
Ollie(before he stopped doing his job) and Hurley recruited fine in the AAC. Obviously it is easier in the Big East, but the conference was not why we sucked with Ollie.
 

Online statistics

Members online
297
Guests online
2,511
Total visitors
2,808

Forum statistics

Threads
159,855
Messages
4,208,066
Members
10,076
Latest member
Mpjd2024


.
Top Bottom