- Joined
- Apr 30, 2015
- Messages
- 1,353
- Reaction Score
- 6,654
Thats why Hurley chose UCONN over other schools. B/c we're a major brand with no limits.
Precious Speaks on Recruiting!
- Thread starter StepbackCity
- Start date
Thats why Hurley chose UCONN over other schools. B/c we're a major brand with no limits.
CL82
James Breeding sucks
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 63,757
- Reaction Score
- 250,198
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2015
- Messages
- 14,890
- Reaction Score
- 116,001
Because they bought into revitalizing the brand. Do you really think we have the same draw to recruits we did in years past? Perhaps I'm comparing us to the true blue bloods and you're not. The goal shouldn't be to be Louisville minus the prostitutes. I want a team that is top 10 every year, reeling in multiple 5* and 4* recruits. Not quite there yet, but we're definitely trending positively.
CL82
James Breeding sucks
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 63,757
- Reaction Score
- 250,198
Sigh. Revitalizing the brand, means that there is a brand, right?
So how do you define blue bloods? Who do you feel fits that definition.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2015
- Messages
- 14,890
- Reaction Score
- 116,001
Mention where I said we don't have a brand? "Falling off the map" means we HAD a brand and are losing it. UConn's brand is NOWHERE near as strong as it was. I think a few years of sustained regular season success and some tourney runs could bring us back. A so-so season and a miracle run in the tournament is not going to do it. As much fun as 2014 was (I went to a few games with my father), that's not going to bring back a fan base.
UK, KU, UNC. Not sure a school like UCLA should count any more. Not enough recent sustained success.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2015
- Messages
- 1,969
- Reaction Score
- 10,554
I think programs go through up and downs, but if I were picking 10 programs that were bonafide blueblood schools - then it's absolutely Duke, North Carolina, UCLA, Kentucky and Kansas. I really don't care that UCLA has struggled a bit the past few years. They were still more dominant for longer than just about anyone. And actually dominant. Multiple, multi-year UConn women-esque national title runs. Not including them just gets you laughed at.
I get more stuck on our standing than anyone else, tbh. Part of that is recency bias just because I still feel like childhood wasn't that long ago, even though i've been alive for the entire rise of the program. I guess I still have this underlying sense of us being this up and coming program/underdog team that I haven't been able to shake since childhood. And with the dip in the last few years, I feel like that's been reinforced in a weird way.
But then you look at our resume and I mean - we were basically the best basketball program in the country from 2011-2011. Duke's really the only other team in the conversation there, maybe UNC - but certainly not Kentucky and while Kansas was really good - they weren't as good as we were.
From 1990, we won four national titles, went to the Final Four five times, the elite eight 9 times, won the best basketball league in the country TEN times and won the conference tournament 8 times. That's NUTS when you think about it. And if we're basing UCLA's dominance over a 20 year period of time, then well - our 20 year period isn't that- but it isn't anything to sneeze at.
And you also just have a ton of schools after that where it's really mixed.
Like yeah, Indiana won a ton. Kinda similar trajectory to us, tbh - but when they faded they never QUITE got back to where they were in the late 70s-early 90s. But their name is also synonymous with college basketball. Syracuse as much as I hate them - have probably been a little more consistent than us, more final fours, but can't get the job done in the final. Villanova has a lot of national championships but have never been a truly consistent elite program ever, really. Louisville is a dark horse, too. three national titles, 10 final fours and save for a gap where they weren't truly elite in the 90s, they've been pretty consistent. Michigan State probably deserves to be in the conversation, too - w/ a resume similar to us with more final fours but fewer national championships.
So I dunno - I feel like we're better than those guys, but still aren't quite the big five. I'm not mad about that or anything or blame it on anything other than the inferiority complex ingrained in me from the 90s.
I get more stuck on our standing than anyone else, tbh. Part of that is recency bias just because I still feel like childhood wasn't that long ago, even though i've been alive for the entire rise of the program. I guess I still have this underlying sense of us being this up and coming program/underdog team that I haven't been able to shake since childhood. And with the dip in the last few years, I feel like that's been reinforced in a weird way.
But then you look at our resume and I mean - we were basically the best basketball program in the country from 2011-2011. Duke's really the only other team in the conversation there, maybe UNC - but certainly not Kentucky and while Kansas was really good - they weren't as good as we were.
From 1990, we won four national titles, went to the Final Four five times, the elite eight 9 times, won the best basketball league in the country TEN times and won the conference tournament 8 times. That's NUTS when you think about it. And if we're basing UCLA's dominance over a 20 year period of time, then well - our 20 year period isn't that- but it isn't anything to sneeze at.
And you also just have a ton of schools after that where it's really mixed.
Like yeah, Indiana won a ton. Kinda similar trajectory to us, tbh - but when they faded they never QUITE got back to where they were in the late 70s-early 90s. But their name is also synonymous with college basketball. Syracuse as much as I hate them - have probably been a little more consistent than us, more final fours, but can't get the job done in the final. Villanova has a lot of national championships but have never been a truly consistent elite program ever, really. Louisville is a dark horse, too. three national titles, 10 final fours and save for a gap where they weren't truly elite in the 90s, they've been pretty consistent. Michigan State probably deserves to be in the conversation, too - w/ a resume similar to us with more final fours but fewer national championships.
So I dunno - I feel like we're better than those guys, but still aren't quite the big five. I'm not mad about that or anything or blame it on anything other than the inferiority complex ingrained in me from the 90s.
.-.
CL82
James Breeding sucks
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 63,757
- Reaction Score
- 250,198
Definition?
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 56,209
- Reaction Score
- 213,685
Sustained greatness year in and year out coupled with championships. Duke, Kentucky, Carolina, and Kansas.
CL82
James Breeding sucks
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 63,757
- Reaction Score
- 250,198
So you are saying that losing hurts a team brand and winning helps it?
Insightful.
Again, if you think that today's players don't remember the 2014 championship (your original premise) you are wrong.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2015
- Messages
- 14,890
- Reaction Score
- 116,001
Knew I was forgetting one. Blue Devils needed to be in there too.
I'd add that the success needs to transcend one coach--why I wouldn't include UCLA or UConn (yet).
CL82
James Breeding sucks
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 63,757
- Reaction Score
- 250,198
Mmm doesn't that take Duke out? Doesn't UConn meet that definition?
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2015
- Messages
- 14,890
- Reaction Score
- 116,001
Are you making any better insights? I needed to make such an "insightful" comment because you haven't seemed to figure it out.
You're taking the premise too literally. They remember it happened. But UConn has been off the map long enough the shine of those moments has dulled.
.-.
CL82
James Breeding sucks
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 63,757
- Reaction Score
- 250,198
Good start, need to define "sustained" and "greatness" to make it quantifiable, but generally agree. Does a missed NCAA tourney break the chain? What about a losing season?
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2015
- Messages
- 1,969
- Reaction Score
- 10,554
It's also totally discounting their coaches talking up UConn. While we might not be as on their radar as we were, we were on their coach's radars.
We're still a great school to come play at and hey - a couple of runs, capitalizing on the media buzz we've been getting (can't believe i'm saying this) and we're right back. My point is - the ladder back up isn't nearly as long as the one we took to get up in the first place.
We're still a great school to come play at and hey - a couple of runs, capitalizing on the media buzz we've been getting (can't believe i'm saying this) and we're right back. My point is - the ladder back up isn't nearly as long as the one we took to get up in the first place.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2015
- Messages
- 14,890
- Reaction Score
- 116,001
Duke was successful before K. They lost in the national final, what, 2 years before he arrived?
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2015
- Messages
- 14,890
- Reaction Score
- 116,001
You're ridiculous man. Ignored. This is a basketball forum, not a law office.
CL82
James Breeding sucks
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 63,757
- Reaction Score
- 250,198
Nope. I just disagree with original premise that today's players don't remember our 2014 championship. They do, they are also well aware of 2011 and our players history of NBA success. Did you ask your kids if they knew who UConn was and whether they aware of our natties?
.-.
CL82
James Breeding sucks
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 63,757
- Reaction Score
- 250,198
It's a UConn men's basketball forum. When you assert that today's kid's don't remember that UConn has national championships, you will get called on it.
Here's a tip: If you don't want people to talk about your opinions, it's best not to post them in a sports forum.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 30,646
- Reaction Score
- 53,289
Mid 2000s, not early. Recruiting really got going around the Charlie Villanueva, Ed Nelson, Rudy Gay classes.
Prior to that, players like Emeka Okafor were not top 50 recruits. Neither was Josh Boone. Ben Gordon was top 40 but UConn always snagged one of those (Jalen Adams for instance).
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2015
- Messages
- 1,969
- Reaction Score
- 10,554
Yeah I mean - elite level recruiting was never a huge thing in the 90s for us. It was usually a bunch of top 100-ish kids, a top-50 guy and then say - a Ray Allen/DOnyell Marshall STUD.
Also Jim Calhoun's ability to evaluate talent was pretty second to none.
Also Jim Calhoun's ability to evaluate talent was pretty second to none.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 56,209
- Reaction Score
- 213,685
Sustained, those schools are great almost every year. They are ranked way more often in the top 10 than out of it. You can have an occasional team miss a tournament but most often your team is ranked top 10 and you're a legitimate threat to make a run to the final 4. UConn has the titles but there are just too many seasons where they've missed the tournament.
CL82
James Breeding sucks
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 63,757
- Reaction Score
- 250,198
I actually think your def is about as good as I have seen. I think some people add a history ("good in the 1950s") component to it. My point is there's no hard and fast criteria, per se. It's a moving target. Duke broke through with sustained success. Some would say we did as well. But it really doesn't mean anything.
If Dan Hurley is a good as we think, the past two years will be forgotten soon enough.
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2015
- Messages
- 1,969
- Reaction Score
- 10,554
While you're right on the consistency front, I think this fan base is unique in a weird way in terms of how much it exists in a bubble. And I don't mean that in a bad way, really - but in my experience - there isn't a fan base that has a poorer grasp or self awareness as to their national standing than ours. And there's good reason for that.
But fans from other programs literally want nothing to do with UConn in the tournament. That's kind of our reputation - at least as i've observed it. I remember pinging around a Kansas board in 2016 and they were nervous even though *we* probably knew they didn't need to be. There was a mountain of posts that boiled down to 'well, we're better, but it's still UConn, so..."
Kansas has a reputation for choking in the tournament. Kentucky kind of does. We don't.
We've basically left a generation of hoops fans PTSD about playing us in the NCAA's - and there's something to be said for that. And the rest of the country sees us as a pretty big deal. We're a big game program. A place you come to win when it matters. And that's a really good thing.
Arizona pegged US as their travel destination for this year b/c they knew it'd sell and packed an entire section or two at the Civic Center. We're still a big deal.
.-.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2011
- Messages
- 56,209
- Reaction Score
- 213,685
And yet 1991 was the best recruiting class we've ever brought in.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2015
- Messages
- 14,890
- Reaction Score
- 116,001
I think 2019 could be hurley's 1991 if we get precious and kofi. Kind of that class that turns some heads, and gets the intertia in our favor. If that makes sense
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 23,990
- Reaction Score
- 21,320
If winning national championships is not sufficient to "bring back a fan base," we don't have a fan base deserving of a national championship.
Please stop.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 17,002
- Reaction Score
- 39,877
We need to be relevant all year. That's what recruits care about -- exposure, buzz, and getting to the NBA. They don't care about championships. If they happen to win en route to getting that exposure, buzz, and NBA attention, great, but that's not their priority.
The last time we were relevant wire to wire was, maybe, 2011, and even then we fell off somewhat in the middle of the year. Since then:
2012 -- only relevant at the beginning of the year with a high preseason ranking; forgotten after that
2013 -- irrelevant all year (maybe some buzz with the MSU win)
2014 -- relevant early and late, but largely forgotten in the middle
2015 -- see 2012
2016 -- irrelevant except for maybe a week and a half of buzz between Jalen's shot and the Kansas game
2017 -- irrelevant all year
2018 -- irrelevant all year
That's 7 years over which we've been prominent on the national stage for less than a quarter of the time. That's a major turn-off to top recruits whose other options are constantly talked about and featured on ESPN, etc.
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2015
- Messages
- 14,890
- Reaction Score
- 116,001
Put me on ignore then.
As tens said, we need to be relevant all year to get a better fan base. CT is super apathetic about college sports--it shows. A cultural shift needs to occur.
Temporary success = temporary fans. Hurley has made a priority of energizing the fans, which will help i hope
.-.