At this point, shouldnât the only comparison be to Tonyâs Washington State record? Before he came to Virginia? I donât think he was transcendent at Wazzu.
In ten years, we can say whether Odom was comparable to Tony.
4 Likes
Thatâs human nature. Thatâs exactly what is going on at Baylor right now too, imo.
2 Likes
Not sure what your point is. Just because Nick Foles can QB a team to a Super Bowl doesnât mean you want to hand the keys over to him long term. Same thing with Clark.
But KCâs role was a little different there in 2019 donât you think?
Regardless, I thought he started about half the time in 19. I could be wrong on that.
Itâs been a long time. But we didnât really have to depend on him for offense in 2019. He was more of a facilitator his first year.
Again, itâs neither here nor there, but why did his role expand so much after 2019? Why was UVA depending on him to be more of a scorer? Either way, itâs an indictment on recruiting.
1 Like
I agree with that to some extent, but 1) I think the quote a few spots up in the thread from Jay Wright backs the sentiment that there were some evaluation flaws post-title, and 2) not all of the guys you listed were end of the bench guys. Paul Jesperson was a starter, in fact. KT Harrell and Marial Shayok were both either â5th startersâ or first guards off the bench. The primary differences in post-title players and pre-title players still come down to evaluation and the college basketball climate at the time.
Thatâs all true.
But its still a recruiting problem. Continuity is a luxury that really no longer exists in todayâs climate, and Bennett & staff did a mediocre job at putting together a roster that could compete at a high level for the last few years. And thatâs really all that matters. Recruiting rankings donât matter, continuity doesnât matter, development is no longer primary. All that matters is recruiting a roster talented enough to compete at a high level the upcoming season.
2 Likes
I mean thatâs why I said âmay notâ. He very well could be, but I think itâs unlikely that he will, cause the odds are so low for ANY coach to be that gifted/elite.
IMO, Odoms resume rn is better than Hurley or Otzs before they went to their current respective institutions. So itâs well within the range of possibility for him to be exceptional (especially when considering his strong ties to UVA and his fit here). Letâs hope he translates as well as those 2 did to the power conference level
7 Likes
Dukeâs success explained in a nutshell. Maybe happens at Kentucky or one or two other schools. Dukeâs coach will be at top of the pyramid because K built a model to succeed at the NIL unlimited non-restricted transfer world before that world came into existence - K was getting beat in the old pre-Covid world because development and actual coaching did matter. And K is evilly smart enough to have figured all of that out - if you canât win change the rules to make it so you do win.
KY is figuring out the new rules as well to take advantage of its brand. UNC will gets its act together, fire Hubie, and get the ball rolling again based on its brand. Pearl and Auburn are safely ensconced in the new hierarchy. Maybe Hurley is a genius and can be an exception, but the $ will be equal across programs, so the brand will matter more and more, not the coach. Maybe UConn is a big enough brand?
In short, it seems as if WFS is right, UVa (and the rest of college basketball) is f*kd.
Duh
1 Like
If we simply look at retention of the guys we actually signed like other programs who have been able to keep dudes home because they get paid nowâŚ.and rules in place about dangerous activities.
Our top 8-9 rotation this year could have easily been this:
Reece, IMac, Ames/Gertrude, Dunn, Milicic, Shedrick, Robinson, Cofie, Murray + Bond and Traudt
Thatâs a sweet 16 team all day. Minimum.
5 Likes
Dunnâs base salary this year is $2.5M. Not many first-rounders stay in college, even if colleges could match that.
5 Likes
No, but a lot of the top programs were able to hold onto guys for a 5th year, like Reece. Retaining him wouldâve been helpful. But if the $7-8 mm, 4x last year (see NIL thread) figures are correct, we were only working with $2mm (I thought higher), so it might have been tough to outbid a 2 way contract since we had to pay TJPortal so much.
4 Likes
All three of those players were watching their playing time diminish. In Harrellâs and Shayokâs case, they were probably losing PT due to their perceived reluctance to play in Coach Bennettâs schemes. Regardless, younger players were either passing them by, or were about to do so. They were headed towards the end of the bench.
Coach Bennettâs problem wasnât putting together a roster. It was keeping the roster together. For the past two seasons, there have been very, very few players who have been with the program for more than two years. His schemes demanded experience from within, and there was precious little of that. Regardless, there have always been recruiting obstacles for UVaâs coaches. I believe that they are the reason that Coach Gibson left, that Coach Holland retired from coaching, and, that ultimately, they were responsible for the dismissals of Coach Jones, Coach Gillen, and Coach Leitao. And, if Virginia were at a disadvantage in the world of high school recruiting, I suspect that transfers are going to be even more problematic.
Wonder if Tony got increasingly disinterested in playing the recruiting game that was evolving rapidly away from our system. And the outcome was written.
5 Likes
I think I generally agree with you, but itâs hard to just rely on these rankings because they donât consider transfers. In more recent years that would hurt us as we havenât donât a great job in the modern portal, but simply looking at recruiting rankings post 2016 ignores guys like Key, Hauser, and Murphy, who would be extremely highly ranked if that was a thing at the time.
The bigger issue is guys who were supposed to pan out didnât, whether because of a missed eval or transfer. Morsell, Shedrick, Jabri, McCorkle, Taine, McKneely, Bond, Traudt, Dunn, Buchanan, and Gertrude were all pretty nice recruiting wins. From a rankings perspective, those guys should have been what we needed to sustain success. Obviously, only a small handful of that group have lived up to expectations.
3 Likes
Iâd shortcut it (for once), like this:
Bigs - major issue was retention
Guards - major issue was the caliber went down a few clicks (complicating factor: Elijah Gâs injuries)
8 Likes
Post 2019, we still had two teams (20-21 and 22-23) that had second weekend potential. The covid situation complicated the first, but both still highlighted teams that woefully underperformed in the NCAAs. Which was a product of system rigidity that was very easy to plan for.
I think if either /both of those teams performed as expected (letâs say S16), the 5 year run post title is viewed slightly differently.
9 Likes
And my point is, how are their situations any different from the guys who left after the title? Shedrick, Morsell, McCorkle, Caffaro, Milicic, etc. were all either end of bench guys or guys whose roles were diminishing. The situations are no different than those before the natty; it just happened more frequently afterwards.
Not slightlyâŚ. Significantly.
1 Like
Shayokâs minutes went up in each of his years at Virginia.
But he was never going to get more than 25 minutes â certainly not the 32.5 he got in Ames â and particularly not with Hall, Guy, and Jerome coming back, and withHunter coming off the redshirt.
1 Like
2021 had an excuse. They were loaded but were obviously thrown a curveball that was beyond their control. Sure they still should have won but you can at least explain what happened.
2023 was simply unacceptable. Still makes me mad. That team probably wasnât going to a final 4 but it was a good team. I was there in Greensboro to watch them beat UNC and Clemson. They easily could/should have made a run. And that Furman game was OVER until it wasnât.
12 Likes