2200 days of Brad Edwards

[gmubrian]

Recruiting is sales. You have a salesman (coach) selling a product (school, playing time, scholarship, etc.).

Some coaches are not as good salesmen, but they have better products, so it's easier to sell; and vice versa. There are thousands of factors that go into recruiting, but the biggest is winning.

Is there any doubt the guys we are going after and getting on campus for visits now are a higher caliber than when Paulsen started? Serious question - it seems to me they are. The more we win, the more we will be able to actually get those higher ranked kids to commit. It's like rolling a snow ball uphill with varying weather conditions.

11-21 (5-13), 20-14 (9-9), 16-17(9-9), 16-14 (10-7) I would say is steady improvement (could reasonably get to 18 wins this year), especially if you put it on a graph that includes the Virus years. Seroiusly, go back and look at how bad they were. Now we've had 2 straight years on the cusp of top 4 with limited rosters (and criticism for the composition of the roster is certainly fair game).

You can argue regression from the 20 win 2nd season, but I don't think he should be penalized for over-performing win-wise that year, mostly in part to the god that Marquise was that year.

Question is - will we win enough, soon enough, to yield the results that the fans and admin expect? And those are likely to be two very different sets of expectations. I think in general, fans and decision makers in sports are typically far too quick to jump on the "fire him" bandwagon, so I'm typically a late adopter intentionally in that regard. Especially when we are a program with relatively limited financial resources.

Disclaimer - I'm aware there is plenty to counter this post in a negative way: has had 4 years to build roster, has not recruited enough A10 caliber players, too many home losses, consistently inconsistent, etc. But that all goes back to my salesman analogy, this doesn't happen in a vacuum. Snowball. Uphill.

If I play the game you have laid out...

Using your salesman analogy, I view the Virus as the polished owner of a car lot that sold you a shiny sports car that turned out to be a lemon. It drove fine until you got it home, and the it completely fell apart. I view Paulsen as the "blue collar" owner of a car lot. He started out as a mechanic, and he is selling you reliable cars, but they are not the prettiest or most exciting, but they are reliable and never stop running. The former is much easier to sell, than the latter. You hope that latter is successful, but it is an uphill battle and not clear if he will ever be successful with this business model.

If we are going to use your measure of improvement being solely the wins and losses, I think conference performance is a more appropriate measure than anything else. If you use that, it is looking like he has pretty much stagnated the last 3 years, with a slight uptick this year.

My disclaimer:

Now, let me make it clear that I am not in the fire Paulsen crowd (yet). This year has been disappointing based on expectations, but I see some improvement in the team year over year. There is also the fact that my opinion means practically nothing given my support of the team, zilch in any financial way (no ticket purchases and no donations, though they might have gotten a couple dollars of that 7 dollar drink I bought at one game). That being said, my main concern with Paulsen remains recruiting. I can't tell if there is light at the end of the tunnel on that one or not. The main reason I am not on the fire Paulsen bandwagon (yet) is practical a practical one. We are, arguably, about halfway between the dumpster fire we were and being an A10 championship contender. We are not firing him this year, so that talk is just futile. After this year, he has 3 years left on his contract. Maybe, just maybe, since the buyout is not horrendous, he could be fired next year or the following year if we have regressed. My guess, though, is that it would be with one year left, at most, unless we really regressed. If we get to the point we fired him, it means we are bad or have continued to stagnate and we are a minimum of two to three more years from being a contender after his firing. That is about 5 years from now, give or take a year with variables. I still hold out hope that Paulsen gets us there in less time.

 

[Falco]

Hewitt's identity was he knew how to recruit and get paid. He just wasn't interested, or unable, to coach.

That’s exactly why I have no faith in DP. Hewitt left DP with high caliber recruits. I figured once mason had a quality coach, Mason would get back on track.

 

[Mason2005]

That’s exactly why I have no faith in DP. Hewitt left DP with high caliber recruits. I figured once mason had a quality coach, Mason would get back on track.

Hewitt did leave him high caliber recruits but they were all forwards. After Holloway bailed the team had no experienced shooters.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

 

[gmutom]

After Holloway bailed the team had no experienced shooters.

Sadly, I'd say we are back in that exact same boat with this roster four years later. We are vastly limited offensively due to a lack of experienced and capable shooters, which is why many of our opponents just sag back and watch us pass the ball around the perimeter with little fear.

In a guard-oriented league, we are 11th in the conference in 3-point attempts per game and 10th in 3-pointers made. Losing Grayer and Mar obviously hurt our stats this year, but I'm not sure our long-range shooting is going to get a whole lot better next year with Otis gone.

 

[GMUgemini]

Sadly, I'd say we are back in that exact same boat with this roster four years later. We are vastly limited offensively due to a lack of experienced and capable shooters, which is why many of our opponents just sag back and watch us pass the ball around the perimeter with little fear.

In a guard-oriented league, we are 11th in the conference in 3-point attempts per game and 10th in 3-pointers made. Losing Grayer and Mar obviously hurt our stats this year, but I'm not sure our long-range shooting is going to get a whole lot better next year with Otis gone.

Otis was part of the shooting issue this season, so was Mar before his injury.

Boyd was shooting close to 40% before hurting his wrist, Hartwell is shooting over 40%, Kier has been shooting well, though his release is still super slow. If Mar can get added to the list next season, I don’t see perimeter shooting as that bad.

Would love to see Miller working on his outside game as well. JDS also has a nice looking shot, but just hasn’t had a lot of luck seeing his shots go down (he also takes some insane shots at times, which he needs to stop doing).

 

[gmutom]

If Mar can get added to the list next season, I don’t see perimeter shooting as that bad.

Other than Hartwell and a healthy Boyd, I don't see a perimeter shooter on our roster our opponents will fear. Kier has been better this year than last, but it takes a lifetime like you mentioned to get that slow, flat-footed shot off. I was excited about Greene's potential, but the hangtime on his shot would make most NFL punters envious. Mar can help a lot if he shoots like he did last year.

Douglas-Stanley could very well be the most lethal shooter on the team, but he also seems like a high-volume guy who doesn't thrive in spot minutes. I do love his confidence and lack of conscience, which every good shooter needs. Miller has a really nice stroke and a willingness to get better, so my hunch/hope is that he will really take his game to the next level as a sophomore.

 

[GMUgemini]

A lot of questions need to be answered next year, for sure. It reminds me of vcu who had a disappointing season last year with Justin Tillman and Jonathan Williams underperforming, going 9-9 and missing the NCAA. This year’s team had a ton of questions going into the season and they answered them all with good answers.

Santos-Silva, Marcus Evans, Isaac Vann all stepped up.

If Our team is going to improve on this season, it’s got to be Mar, Reuter, Kier, and Hartwell answering our questions.

 

[GMUSig03]

Tom/Gemini - is Greene transferring? You guys both seem to have forgotten about him.

His recent slump aside (but still included), he has significantly improved this year as a more consistent scorer. His 3pt shooting has improved from 24% to 30%, just shy of a good average (was 33% before going 0-7 in last 2 games).

Also significantly improved his overall fg% from 35% to 45%. I hope to see 1) similar improvement from Greene into his junior year, and 2) similar improvement from freshmen to sophomore year by JDS.

 

[Falco]

Hewitt did leave him high caliber recruits but they were all forwards. After Holloway bailed the team had no experienced shooters.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

He forced him out.

 

[GMUgemini]

He forced him out.

I don’t think so. Holloway had academic issues and quit the team because he wasn’t going to graduate otherwise.

 

[gmutom]

Tom/Gemini - is Greene transferring? You guys both seem to have forgotten about him.

Definitely not. I mentioned him above. I think he's showed today the consistent shooter we all thought he would be and can be. I still think he gets too much arc on his shot, but he, Miller and Douglas-Stanley all have the potential to be a consistently good shooters.

 

[Five Two]

USA Today is out with a list of coach's salaries:
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/mens-basketball/coach/

 

[TweederGMU]

USA Today is out with a list of coach's salaries:
http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/mens-basketball/coach/

UNC is getting a bargain. Thought Roy would easily be making 5 million plus

 

[GSII]

I don't think they have to report what their private fundraising arm chips in to pay Roy..I'm thinking it's just the public funds that have to be reported.

 

[Five Two]

This could sit in a variety of different threads, but I'll put this article on vcu leveraging their Final Four run here. (Credit to a friend who sent this to me)
https://richmondbizsense.com/2019/03/18/vcu-athletics-budget-doubled-since-2011-final-four-run/

“The next year, vcu announced it would be moving from the Colonial Athletic Association to the Atlantic 10 Conference, a move driven in part by the school’s desire to capitalize on the spotlight and learn from what it saw as miscalculations by then-fellow CAA school George Mason University, which had made a miraculous Final Four run of its own in 2006. GMU joined the Atlantic 10 in 2013, but has made the NCAA tournament only twice since its Final Four appearance.

“I don’t want anybody to take this the wrong way, but we saw their Final Four run and said, ‘Hey we need to do anything we can to continue the momentum from that Final Four run,’” Cupps said of GMU.

“That meant trying to keep our head coach, moving to a higher-level conference if the opportunity arises and building a basketball practice facility so we can really take advantage of that brief period of time that was so exciting,” he said, adding that he believes GMU is now heading in the right direction.”

 

[dr. gunnie]

This could sit in a variety of different threads, but I'll put this article on vcu leveraging their Final Four run here. (Credit to a friend who sent this to me)
https://richmondbizsense.com/2019/03/18/vcu-athletics-budget-doubled-since-2011-final-four-run/

“The next year, vcu announced it would be moving from the Colonial Athletic Association to the Atlantic 10 Conference, a move driven in part by the school’s desire to capitalize on the spotlight and learn from what it saw as miscalculations by then-fellow CAA school George Mason University, which had made a miraculous Final Four run of its own in 2006. GMU joined the Atlantic 10 in 2013, but has made the NCAA tournament only twice since its Final Four appearance.

“I don’t want anybody to take this the wrong way, but we saw their Final Four run and said, ‘Hey we need to do anything we can to continue the momentum from that Final Four run,’” Cupps said of GMU.

“That meant trying to keep our head coach, moving to a higher-level conference if the opportunity arises and building a basketball practice facility so we can really take advantage of that brief period of time that was so exciting,” he said, adding that he believes GMU is now heading in the right direction.”

Having a dedicated practice facility is important? But Hewitt said it wasn’t and that the RAC was just fine. I’m so confused - who to believe?!?!

Q: As someone who has coached in the Big East and ACC and has been exposed to top athletic facilities, how was your experience with the basketball training facilities here at Mason, holding practices at the Patriot Center and the RAC?

A: Well I think we have terrific facilities. I like practicing in the RAC, because it gives us some privacy. I love the number of baskets we have at our disposal and also the space, because we tend to so a lot of shooting drills at practices. Obviously the Patriot Center is a terrific home court, and also it is an adequate practice facility. But I think the RAC is outstanding. I have told Tom O'Connor on many occasions that the accessibility and the availability we have to that facility is outstanding. I think it going to help us a lot. It helps us in recruiting when we bring kids in there, show them that as our practice site. They love the fact that we can get in there, use as many baskets as we can. They can work on things; I think it is one of the better parts of our program to have that facility.

https://gomason.com/news/2012/9/20/205689762.aspx

This is pretty much the time I knew Hewitt was just going to be a yes man for TO’C and the athletic department was doomed.

 

[gmutom]

This is pretty much the time I knew Hewitt was just going to be a yes man for TO’C and the athletic department was doomed.

I don't disagree with the "yes man" part, but I also wonder if he didn't want to admit publicly that we have inferior facilities because he knew potential 6-foot-7 recruits might read it and be turned off. My biggest concern would be if he accepted it behind closed doors, especially knowing the impact such facilities had at his previous jobs.

 

[GMUgemini]

Other than building the practice facility, Mason had, one, no opportunity to move into the A10 the following year, and, two we kept our coach for five years following our final four. So it’s obviously not either of those two things that we failed to do.

vcu hasld the infrastructure already in place to capitalize, we were starting from the ground floor. Had L stayed, does vcu have nearly as successful of a season? They got to play a virus coached team sans Hancock three times.

 

[EXpatriot13]

We all keep bringing this up over and over again, and honestly for good reason. We should be frustrated at the previous administration's negligence in not capitalizing on our FF run, despite the fact that it's been 12+ years. Merten and the AD brutally failed at re-investing in our program and modernizing our marketing and brand proposition.

Our frustration should be shown and used to fuel this administration's commitment to our basketball program. The practice facility is half complete, the locker rooms are well on their way, decent gains on the court. We've seen some improvement, we need more. I think the program really struggles with marketing and communications. If you walk around campus (granted, I haven't been on campus in 4 years so this might have changed) you wouldn't even really know that we HAVE a basketball team, let alone one that has made the Final Four. It's our flagship sport, they should be showing it off and branding it all over the place (in places that make sense). In the age of social media, they should be blasting out picture updates of their new locker rooms, renderings of the potential practice facility addition, show the players hanging out on campus together and taking advantage of the many campus-side upgrades we've seen over the years - recruits are on social media and that's the #1 way to connect with them these days. They need to turn Mason Basketball, not Mason Athletics, into its own brand. These are things that don't require incremental budget.

Again, we've seen improvement - but we need to see more. I long for the day where people don't just say "oh yea, didn't they make the Final Four awhile back?", but instead say "oh yea, they made the Final Four and also did X, Y and Z."

 

[gmujim92]

We all keep bringing this up over and over again, and honestly for good reason. We should be frustrated at the previous administration's negligence in not capitalizing on our FF run, despite the fact that it's been 12+ years. Merten and the AD brutally failed at re-investing in our program and modernizing our marketing and brand proposition.

Our frustration should be shown and used to fuel this administration's commitment to our basketball program. The practice facility is half complete, the locker rooms are well on their way, decent gains on the court. We've seen some improvement, we need more. I think the program really struggles with marketing and communications. If you walk around campus (granted, I haven't been on campus in 4 years so this might have changed) you wouldn't even really know that we HAVE a basketball team, let alone one that has made the Final Four. It's our flagship sport, they should be showing it off and branding it all over the place (in places that make sense). In the age of social media, they should be blasting out picture updates of their new locker rooms, renderings of the potential practice facility addition, show the players hanging out on campus together and taking advantage of the many campus-side upgrades we've seen over the years - recruits are on social media and that's the #1 way to connect with them these days. They need to turn Mason Basketball, not Mason Athletics, into its own brand. These are things that don't require incremental budget.

Again, we've seen improvement - but we need to see more. I long for the day where people don't just say "oh yea, didn't they make the Final Four awhile back?", but instead say "oh yea, they made the Final Four and also did X, Y and Z."

Agree with every single word of this.