Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



Username Post: The state of Brown hoops
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3765

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
04-02-17 10:23 PM - Post#228462    
    In response to Bruno

  • Bruno Said:
There was a time when Yale and Harvard felt like similar situations to Brown. Consistent also-rans that finished bottom half more than they finished top-half. They didn't have storied facilities that kids were dying to play in like Penn had, or impressive fan turnout like Penn and Princeton had. Their main asset was academic reputation, and that didn't translate into recruits or wins. It didn't change until they got game changing coaches, which over time led to better recruits and better programs.

Cornell turned that around too. Then Steve Donahue left and they lost the appeal.

In short, not too long ago, two of the top programs today were beset by the similar institutional disadvantages to what Brown faces. And they overcame that, and became choice places to play in the Ivy.

I think that in most cases it is about who the coach is. That's what gets you over the hump. And yes, humps exist. But they haven't only existed at Brown.



I don't agree with this version of events at all. SG is correct-- the hiring of Amaker coincided with a complete transformation in the university's attitude towards basketball. We'll never know, but had everything changed but Sullivan, Harvard might still be pretty much where they are today. Frank Sullivan was a very good coach who was forced to work with virtually none of the support Amaker has.

As for Yale, Jones' hiring had nothing to do with their recent success. He's been there 18 years. The difference is that Yale has been able to recruit much more effectively than it used to, partly because of its financial aid advantage, partly because the university is actually trying to put a winning team on the floor (this is relatively new), and partly because Harvard's turnaround has made recruits view Yale in a new light.

And regarding Cornell, Donahue was a good coach who labored in obscurity for years. Then three exceptional players basically dropped into his lap-- prior to that Cornell had had very little recruiting success. Donahue, being no dummy, knew exactly what to do with those guys, and won three consecutive titles with them. However, once those players were gone, Cornell's basketball program, which clearly enjoys no institutional support, was going right back where it had been. So Donahue got out of town. We'll see what Brian Earl is able to do there. My expectation is that he'll make things a bit better and then leave for a better job.

So, I think the lesson here is that while coaches matter, without institutional support, John Wooden himself wouldn't be able turn out a winner. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. You can keep telling yourself that Brown is just a magical coach away from Shambala, but I think you're dreaming.
NOTE: You are viewing an individual Post. View the Entire Topic




Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved.
Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution.
FusionBB™ Version 2.1 | ©2003-2007 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.264 seconds.   Total Queries: 13   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 04:44 AM
Top