Hurley on next year's team

[navery12]

I'd agree if we were losing a bench player, BUT, we're not losing a bench player. We already have spots 11 & 12 & 13 on the team. We are losing the ability to recruit a rotation player or impact player at at least 1 position of need. Not having that additional player could impact whether we make post season play next year, or how far we could go in post season play if we do make it. Post season play equals money for us and the conference. Post season play also influences our perception as a recruiting destination, and winning puts fannies in the seats. We potentially self imposed a big additional financial penalty by picking this year to hurt ourselves, rather than deferring to when spot #13 was really the scholarship being lost.

Why couldn't the adverse financial ramifications of meeting the situation head on, firing Ollie as the perpetrator, bearing legal expenses, reputational injury, etc, be argued in the future as a sufficient self imposed penalty of millions? Far more damage in money than the nominal infraction. Plus, there supposedly is the increased contractual emphasis in Hurley's deal to stress compliance, which addresses future remediation. I see those actions as easily argued as both proactive and sufficient, rather than as 'waiting to get slammed'.

As far as working out for every team; As 1 example; Didn't Syracuse get their penalties increased far beyond what they self imposed?

I'm not arguing that there is a right or wrong in this. I'm just stating my view that the athletic dept has hurt the program's ability to win next year, in a manner that wasn't necessary.

I don't agree at all, I highly doubt they just decided to aimlessly self impose sanctions for no reason. I would take this situation 100 times out of 100 over waiting and having to deal with post season bans and even more harsh scholarship reductions. The idea isn't to get off easy when you self impose, it's to get off easier

 

[Ricker]

I don't buy the argument that we have athletic dept geniuses who have saved us from a scary fate. Using The Boneyard as a measure of the seriousness of the violations, I recall thread after thread debating whether Ollie's transgressions were even serious enough to support the administration's position to fire him for cause without paying him his $10,000,000. Factually, that still hasn't been established. I don't recall any debate or fear on the board resulting in similar threads as to how we needed to head off imminent significant ncaa penalties. From my recollection, the self imposed loss of a scholarship came out of the blue from a Boneyard discussion perspective. There was no expectation of us being potentially banned in the post season or losing future scholarships, no asterixis on tcf15's scholarship grids, and the reason is likely because the 'violations' aren't much. If I was betting, I'd wager this arose as more of a legal strategy to reinforce the university's position in the Ollie litigation that the university truly fired Ollie believing ncaa violations occurred and that the timing occurred this year so it could be incorporated into the arguments of that litigation. I think it has more to do with $10 mill than the ncaa. The ncaa could have been appeased with a loss of a scholarship next year just as easily.

 

[tcf15]

I don't buy the argument that we have athletic dept geniuses who have saved us from a scary fate. Using The Boneyard as a measure of the seriousness of the violations, I recall thread after thread debating whether Ollie's transgressions were even serious enough to support the administration's position to fire him for cause without paying him his $10,000,000. Factually, that still hasn't been established. I don't recall any debate or fear on the board resulting in similar threads as to how we needed to head off imminent significant ncaa penalties. From my recollection, the self imposed loss of a scholarship came out of the blue from a Boneyard discussion perspective. There was no expectation of us being potentially banned in the post season or losing future scholarships, no asterixis on tcf15's scholarship grids, and the reason is likely because the 'violations' aren't much. If I was betting, I'd wager this arose as more of a legal strategy to reinforce the university's position in the Ollie litigation that the university truly fired Ollie believing ncaa violations occurred and that the timing occurred this year so it could be incorporated into the arguments of that litigation. I think it has more to do with $10 mill than the ncaa. The ncaa could have been appeased with a loss of a scholarship next year just as easily.

Based on the notice of allegations from the NCAA, it's likely UConn was going to lose a scholarship no matter what:
A notice of allegations sent by the NCAA to both UConn and Ollie reveals that Ollie faces a Level 1 unethical charge due to false or misleading information about phone calls between former UConn stars Ray Allen and Rudy Gay and a highly-touted recruit. The NCAA also states that Ollie lied when denying he knew of impermissable workouts given to multiple UConn players, both on campus and in Atlanta, by Derek Hamilton, a personal friend.

The news was first reported by ESPN on Friday night.

Ollie was charged with multiple violations — providing unfair recruiting benefits, exceeding limits on recruiting hours, failing to promote an atmosphere of compliance, failing to monitor players' outside workouts — that all fall under a coaching responsibility violation.

Ollie was fired with “just cause” on March 10 after six seasons. UConn has determined that Ollie violated multiple NCAA rules and failed to promote a culture of compliance, and the sides are now battling over the more than $10 million remaining on his contract. That is due to go to arbitration unless a resolution through negotiation can be reached.

UConn’s case appeared to become a lot stronger now, however, with the NCAA’s notice of allegations. The program isn’t out of the woods in terms of receiving any sort of punishment from the NCAA, though that wouldn’t figure to be a particularly strict penalty.

 

[Ricker]

I stand corrected

 

[UConn_Top_Dog]

Based on the notice of allegations from the NCAA, it's likely UConn was going to lose a scholarship no matter what:
A notice of allegations sent by the NCAA to both UConn and Ollie reveals that Ollie faces a Level 1 unethical charge due to false or misleading information about phone calls between former UConn stars Ray Allen and Rudy Gay and a highly-touted recruit. The NCAA also states that Ollie lied when denying he knew of impermissable workouts given to multiple UConn players, both on campus and in Atlanta, by Derek Hamilton, a personal friend.

The news was first reported by ESPN on Friday night.

Ollie was charged with multiple violations — providing unfair recruiting benefits, exceeding limits on recruiting hours, failing to promote an atmosphere of compliance, failing to monitor players' outside workouts — that all fall under a coaching responsibility violation.

Ollie was fired with “just cause” on March 10 after six seasons. UConn has determined that Ollie violated multiple NCAA rules and failed to promote a culture of compliance, and the sides are now battling over the more than $10 million remaining on his contract. That is due to go to arbitration unless a resolution through negotiation can be reached.

UConn’s case appeared to become a lot stronger now, however, with the NCAA’s notice of allegations. The program isn’t out of the woods in terms of receiving any sort of punishment from the NCAA, though that wouldn’t figure to be a particularly strict penalty.

Maybe its a blessing KO was losing so many games. One would have to think if he was winning and getting these recruits he would still be our coach and the penalties would be much harsher.

 

[Scrutiner]

Everybody seems to agree we need to bring in more talent. Everybody seems to agree we are in dire need of a significant front court player with Carlton. There also seems to be agreement that we will rue not having another ball handling guard in case of injury. With only 1 scholarship there is debate over how to bring on 2 or more players if we have non-contributors on the bench eating up scholarships.

Count me as 1 person who is particularly pissed off that we are in this situation based on taking away our own scholarship for this upcoming year with no real benefit. Our 'astute' program management could have postponed penalizing ourselves until the program had been righted talentwise, and, our brand restored in the eyes of our fans, with 'on court' success. We could have put off any NCAA penalty for years and timed any penalty to have an affect commensurate with the nominal violations. Instead, we further injure the ability to restore our financially valuable brand at a critical turnaround time because of nominal violations that most programs would properly shrug off as nothing. Hell, for this trivial stuff we could have self imposed a post season ban for last year, like Syracuse did when they weren't going to post season play anyhow. I don't know specifically who all the decision makers were in this, and if it included Hurley, but it pisses me off.

So there. Take that.

We'll probably never know the real reason(s) for self-imposing a particular level of penalties, but it is likely safe to say one reason was to strengthen our case, based on what had already been discovered, for denying the $10M and another might be the penalties will be levied sooner or later so why not get them out of the way sooner?

As to the latter, doesn't it make sense to take a penalty in year two of the Hurley regime, when he is still rebuilding, rather than waiting until year three or four when we all hope (expect, based on it being the Boneyard) the team will be a seasoned, tournament level team, ready to make some serious noise in the post-season?

 

[CTBasketball]

Only took us 5 pages until KO got brought up. We’re making progress.

 

[ToolzieFan]

Polley: Needs an inside game. He should study Roscoe Smith tapes and follow a demanding strength training
and nutrition program. Roscoe wanted to be a wing but never acquired the long range shot. But man could he defend and bang the boards. When he went to UNLV he was called "the rebounding machine". My favorite image of him is with the black eye in the tournament going up above everyone and fearlessly grabbing boards. Polley may never be a wing. As stated above somewhere the "experiment" has reached the showtime stage.

I agree that I'd like to see Polley rebound better, and it'd be nice if he could capably guard a 4 if we are going small. But he and Roscoe Smith aren't very similar players. Roscoe was an athletic player who averaged 5.2 rebounds and 1.2 blocks as a freshman in the best conference in the country. Your overall point stands, but no amount of watching Roscoe Smith tapes will turn Polley into something he's not. If we have a legitimate frontcourt, Polley will be a nice complimentary player who can hit some threes, won't turn the ball over, and use his length to play D on non-elite wings.

 

[Crank]

asterixis **

**asterisks

 

[dennismenace]

I agree that I'd like to see Polley rebound better, and it'd be nice if he could capably guard a 4 if we are going small. But he and Roscoe Smith aren't very similar players. Roscoe was an athletic player who averaged 5.2 rebounds and 1.2 blocks as a freshman in the best conference in the country. Your overall point stands, but no amount of watching Roscoe Smith tapes will turn Polley into something he's not. If we have a legitimate frontcourt, Polley will be a nice complimentary player who can hit some threes, won't turn the ball over, and use his length to play D on non-elite wings.

As I recall the situation Roscoe wanted to be a 3 when he came to Uconn, He proved he could not consistently hit a three pointer and lacked a handle. JC being the realist said the staff sees you as a 4. Roscoe got the picture and focused on rebounding as his way of continuing to develop and play. When I looked at Polley this season I saw that his shoulders looked much more developed. JC used rebounding drills with regularity. KO and Hurley have this approach of spreading the floor which is prototypical NBA. I get that. You still need someone to rebound besides the guards. Sadly, reminds me in a way of Chuck A. who used to like the perimeter and he was like 6-11 and 260 lbs but hands of stone. I don't really know enough about the comparative athleticism of Polley vs Roscoe but Roscoe was pretty fearless about throwing his body around was not afraid of contact. If you were expected to rebound with JC you pretty much had to have that. I'll leave it at that.

 

[HuskyHawk]

As I recall the situation Roscoe wanted to be a 3 when he came to Uconn, He proved he could not consistently hit a three pointer and lacked a handle. JC being the realist said the staff sees you as a 4. Roscoe got the picture and focused on rebounding as his way of continuing to develop and play. When I looked at Polley this season I saw that his shoulders looked much more developed. JC used rebounding drills with regularity. KO and Hurley have this approach of spreading the floor which is prototypical NBA. I get that. You still need someone to rebound besides the guards. Sadly, reminds me in a way of Chuck A. who used to like the perimeter and he was like 6-11 and 260 lbs but hands of stone. I don't really know enough about the comparative athleticism of Polley vs Roscoe but Roscoe was pretty fearless about throwing his body around was not afraid of contact. If you were expected to rebound with JC you pretty much had to have that. I'll leave it at that.

Polley clearly got stronger. He also turned in some big defensive performances later in the year. I expect he will improve next year. Junior year is often a big leap for guys like him. He shoots 40% from 3. He's a nice player to have on the bench. Whaley is the guy who is more like Roscoe. Similar build, skill set and athleticism.

I look at the team last year and the year before and so many guys who are good at some things, but who aren't complete players, were forced to play major minutes, often out of position.

Polley: good shooter for a 4, ok defense on perimeter players, decent handle for a 4. Lacks size, toughness and interior scoring ability. Doesn't rebound well.
Vital: Good spot up shooter, ok defender, good FT shooter, great rebounder for his size. Tough, hard nosed player. Lacks in passing, ball handling and dribble penetration you want from a starting SG. Forced to play SF due to roster deficiencies.
Larrier: great jump shooter, very good athlete. Forced to play PF where he had none of the tools, size, strength, rebounding to be effective.

 

[ToolzieFan]

As I recall the situation Roscoe wanted to be a 3 when he came to Uconn, He proved he could not consistently hit a three pointer and lacked a handle. JC being the realist said the staff sees you as a 4. Roscoe got the picture and focused on rebounding as his way of continuing to develop and play. When I looked at Polley this season I saw that his shoulders looked much more developed. JC used rebounding drills with regularity. KO and Hurley have this approach of spreading the floor which is prototypical NBA. I get that. You still need someone to rebound besides the guards. Sadly, reminds me in a way of Chuck A. who used to like the perimeter and he was like 6-11 and 260 lbs but hands of stone. I don't really know enough about the comparative athleticism of Polley vs Roscoe but Roscoe was pretty fearless about throwing his body around was not afraid of contact. If you were expected to rebound with JC you pretty much had to have that. I'll leave it at that.

Again, I agree that Polley can become a better rebounder, and that we should work to get him tougher, stronger, and more active. But Roscoe Smith was #16 on ESPN's top 100 when he chose us over Duke, Georgetown, UCLA, West Virginia. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see Polley's upside as a defender and rebounder anywhere close to Roscoe Smith.

 

[the Q]

Again, I agree that Polley can become a better rebounder, and that we should work to get him tougher, stronger, and more active. But Roscoe Smith was #16 on ESPN's top 100 when he chose us over Duke, Georgetown, UCLA, West Virginia. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see Polley's upside as a defender and rebounder anywhere close to Roscoe Smith.

We should be happy if he becomes like deandre

 

[3rdbass]

We should be happy if he becomes like deandre

Deandre? You mean the Deandre who was a better player than Roscoe and who could, score outside and inside, block shots and rebounds. I think his upside is more of a poor man's Deandre.

 

[UCfor3]

I don't think Polley can be like DeAndre. I also don't think Whaley can be as good as Roscoe. Just a different talent level. We all have wishful thinking when it comes to guys on our roster and want them to improve so we can become good again, but it just feels like a lot of our players get severely overrated by people on this board.

 

[HuskyHawk]

We should be happy if he becomes like deandre

I've been defending him, but he's not nearly that good. I don't think his role is as a starter anymore, so he doesn't need to be. Think Phil Nolan, Tyler Olander. Guys who played 10-12 a game. He gives you shooting instead of rebounding, so is a different kind of player.

Edit: And no, @UCfor3 Whaley isn't close to being as good as Roscoe, but his game is similar in terms of what he's good at.

 

[the Q]

I've been defending him, but he's not nearly that good. I don't think his role is as a starter anymore, so he doesn't need to be. Think Phil Nolan, Tyler Olander. Guys who played 10-12 a game. He gives you shooting instead of rebounding, so is a different kind of player.

Edit: And no, @UCfor3 Whaley isn't close to being as good as Roscoe, but his game is similar in terms of what he's good at.

I was just referring to rebounding and only the skill of rebounding.

Because didn’t roscoe end up being one of the top rebounders in the entire country after his transfer?

That’s a really high bar for polley.

 

[HuskyHawk]

I was just referring to rebounding and only the skill of rebounding.

Because didn’t roscoe end up being one of the top rebounders in the entire country after his transfer?

That’s a really high bar for polley.

He sure did. If he didn't lead the nation he was top 5. Poor man's Dennis Rodman is what he became.

I think Polley is an example of the challenge you face focusing on shooters at the 4 position. I'd rather bring in size, defense and rebounding and hope they develop as shooters. If he was a little more athletic, you'd play Polley at the 3.

 

[CL82]

I don't buy the argument that we have athletic dept geniuses who have saved us from a scary fate. Using The Boneyard as a measure of the seriousness of the violations, I recall thread after thread debating whether Ollie's transgressions were even serious enough to support the administration's position to fire him for cause without paying him his $10,000,000. Factually, that still hasn't been established. I don't recall any debate or fear on the board resulting in similar threads as to how we needed to head off imminent significant ncaa penalties. From my recollection, the self imposed loss of a scholarship came out of the blue from a Boneyard discussion perspective. There was no expectation of us being potentially banned in the post season or losing future scholarships, no asterixis on tcf15's scholarship grids, and the reason is likely because the 'violations' aren't much. If I was betting, I'd wager this arose as more of a legal strategy to reinforce the university's position in the Ollie litigation that the university truly fired Ollie believing ncaa violations occurred and that the timing occurred this year so it could be incorporated into the arguments of that litigation. I think it has more to do with $10 mill than the ncaa. The ncaa could have been appeased with a loss of a scholarship next year just as easily.

Could not disagree more with the bulk of your post. (Really you don't have read past "Using The Boneyard as a measure of the seriousness of the violations" to know that your reasoning may be reaching just a tad.)

But I do think that our sacrifice to our NCAA overlords should have been a post season ban for last season. Hey it worked for Syracuse, right?

 

[CTBasketball]

I don't think Polley can be like DeAndre. I also don't think Whaley can be as good as Roscoe. Just a different talent level. We all have wishful thinking when it comes to guys on our roster and want them to improve so we can become good again, but it just feels like a lot of our players get severely overrated by people on this board.

We should be OVERJOYED if Polley becomes even sophomore DeAndre Daniels by the time he graduates.

 

[jibsey]

I don't think Polley can be like DeAndre. I also don't think Whaley can be as good as Roscoe. Just a different talent level. We all have wishful thinking when it comes to guys on our roster and want them to improve so we can become good again, but it just feels like a lot of our players get severely overrated by people on this board.

Agree here, and of course this is not to say that these guys can’t contribute and be of value. Not only does over rating happen here but the idea that magical growth and transformations occur in the off-season is a prevailing theory. Stuff like Brimah bulking to WWE proportions or Jalen becoming a knockdown shooter. Improvement of course but original talent is critical.

 

[dennismenace]

Agree here, and of course this is not to say that these guys can’t contribute and be of value. Not only does over rating happen here but the idea that magical growth and transformations occur in the off-season is a prevailing theory. Stuff like Brimah bulking to WWE proportions or Jalen becoming a knockdown shooter. Improvement of course but original talent is critical.

Original talent (which includes will and performance goals) is also critical in the area of coaching including AAU.