Quakers03
Professor
Posts: 12530
Reg: 12-07-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
06-08-20 04:17 PM - Post#308696
In response to SteveChop
The MTE thing got me too. You'd think Penn would be commended for this and pressure would be applied by other schools to the league to change it. Penn helps the league while its fans get the short end of the scheduling stick. But the idea that this is the advantage that is going to sway a kid to come to Penn over the advantages Harvard presents is absolutely laughable. I love what Mike brings to this board and he has helped me to change the way I view the game, but this is not a stats-based argument. I could see the AI floor argument and I obviously don't have all of those facts, but it seems the weighting being given to the recruiting advantages are very much being viewed through a Harvard-fans lens. Now if Mike is saying that he's so in-tune with the league and it's happenings that he knows EXACTLY why certain students pick a school, that's different.
As to Stu's political leanings, I am so very disappointed.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
06-08-20 04:30 PM - Post#308697
In response to SomeGuy
Was just thinking of him because he's likely to get fired at some point, and he's ended up with a few kids that Harvard was very interested in (folks like Falzon... ugh; AJ Turner via transfer and Jared Jones).
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
06-08-20 04:36 PM - Post#308698
In response to Quakers03
I've commended Penn for this. I love that they're doing it. But there are tons of little administrative things that schools like Harvard and Yale have to deal with that Penn doesn't. They're out of sight to the normal fan because they're relatively trivial in isolation (and not really all that important in aggregate - that's why they aren't news stories even in our small corner of the college basketball world). But it's part of the different playing fields involved in succeeding in this league.
|
SteveChop
PhD Student
Posts: 1154
Reg: 07-28-07
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
06-08-20 05:00 PM - Post#308699
In response to mrjames
To penalize Penn for "violating" a ridiculous rule would be even more ridiculous than the rule but I expect nothing less from Robin Harris. She loves to stick it to Penn - this would give her great jollies.
If you're correct, why would they take so long and let Penn schedule another MTE this year?
|
Quakers03
Professor
Posts: 12530
Reg: 12-07-04
|
2021 Recruiting
06-08-20 05:07 PM - Post#308700
In response to mrjames
And you think those trivial items add up to the needing a better recruiter range you shared last week? You made it seem like it's not even up for debate while also acknowledging the MFN aid issue. Do you not agree that players feel stronger connections to those who offer a "full" package first and that can also give Harvard an advantage?
It may sound like sour grapes from Penn fans but I'd like to ask fans from some of the other schools what they think. We saw what Old Bear thinks.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
06-08-20 05:12 PM - Post#308701
In response to Quakers03
I’m pretty sure I listed out more playing fields than just administrative support...
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
06-08-20 05:24 PM - Post#308702
In response to SteveChop
I haven’t followed up, so it’s possible they decided not to punish Penn, which would be great, as I imagine other Ivies would consider it if it’s explicitly allowed. I may ask if I have the right occasion to, but I don’t tend to do a ton of summer work on the ivybball front.
|
Quakers03
Professor
Posts: 12530
Reg: 12-07-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
06-08-20 05:36 PM - Post#308704
In response to mrjames
I’m pretty sure I listed out more playing fields than just administrative support...
Yeah, we know. We went to the Final 40 years ago. Maybe Steve just didn't push that hard enough this time...Obviously the Palestra and Big 5 are selling points, but put Tommy down here vs Tommy up there and Boston Tommy wins more than Philly Tommy.
Is there a reason you won't answer the question about being offered full first? I love how easily you get your back up over this. I understand when you do it with stats on your side, but this isn't that, unless you're telling us that your inside info puts you in a unique position to know the truth about recruiting decisions, not just the Harvard truth.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1896
Reg: 11-29-04
|
06-08-20 05:39 PM - Post#308705
In response to mrjames
I don't think we have to question Amaker's recruiting ability. Regardless of whether there are any institutional advantages or not, no one in the modern Ivy league has put together top 25 recruiting nationally ever. Not Dunphy, Jones, Donahue, Carmody, Carrill...
I suspect historically Harvard had disadvantages such as its gym, program history, support in the administration, etc. Most of those things have changed BECAUSE of Amaker. He plays hard in the recruiting wars and he's not just winning one or two battles - he's changed the game completely.
That said, I am curious about Donahue's recruiting. He seems like a great guy who runs a great program. I'm not sure it's in his nature to sell a vision and to make the charismatic close on a recruit. Penn has plenty of advantages to sell. This is all conjecture on my side, of course.
The FA advantage is a newer wrinkle for the league. I don't begrudge Harvard offering 100% aid, because it is being offered to ALL students. That said, the league simply needs to move on from no scholarships then. Or at least let all teams provide athletes with the same sliding scale of FA and tuition assistance. The same should be said for the AI. Not sure what the basis is for each school being different. Professional sports teams certainly have unfair advantages relative to each other, but can you imagine if they each had a different salary cap and had different eligibility requirements based on the Wonderlic test? Ridiculous. They should place eligibility requirements based on real and meaningful academic accomplishments at the school, not based on the AI.
|
Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8219
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
06-08-20 06:25 PM - Post#308706
In response to Penndemonium
I just caught up on this thread, and all I can think of is that - for all the discussion about Harvard's advantages - and Amaker's skill set - you'd think his program was regularly been treating Penn like a dwarf on the court for years. That hasn't exactly been the case on Steve's watch. AJ had a lot to do with that - maybe we are just getting really anxious about life without him. For my part, I still think Penn will be very competitive with Harvard and the rest of the league if we have a season and can keep most of the kids healthy.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
06-08-20 06:32 PM - Post#308707
In response to Quakers03
Getting in early with a recruit matters. Offering first matters. But if your question is “does being the first school to provide its financial aid pre-read†matter (or “does being the school that offers the largest financial aid pre-read†matter)... I mean, I think if you polled the coaches, they’d tell you what matters most about that is proving to the recruit that the cost won’t be large relative to getting a full ride outside the Ivies (or knowing it will be and that’s a problem), which is, by the way, in almost all cases something we’re competing against.
Put another way, if FA were so important and coaching recruiting skill so much less important, why aren’t Harvard, Princeton and Yale, which all have similarly rich policies, splitting the battles for the top recruits? So far, Jaelin is the only one that Harvard has lost to either of those two schools. Princeton just lost a kid to Harvard whose dad WENT to Princeton.
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1120
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
06-08-20 07:10 PM - Post#308708
In response to mrjames
Sure I stipulate that Harvard has financial, reputation and coaching advantages regarding recruiting. And the Dodgers and Yankees have financial advantages over every other baseball team. No amount of debate will change that.
But doesn't Penn turn down 90% of its applicants? Its advantages should be more than enough to attract quality college b-ball players. The current crew coming off a dreadful decade and terribly injury prone was more than close enough to all the HYP's to seriously contend when things go right. What more can we ask?
Oh, whatever the recruiting battles ratings said - was not AJ the best Ivy player over the last four years? Was not Devon the fastest player in the league. Was not Woods the best backcourt defender in the league. Would not a healthy Wang start and star for any team in the league.
Was not Wood the best sixth man in the league his second year. Which team recruited them again?
If Steve can avoid the blank years like the current seniors, the talent is sufficient otherwise. Maybe not like it was in the 70's but clearly sufficient.
|
pennsive
Junior
Posts: 200
Reg: 11-21-04
|
06-08-20 10:28 PM - Post#308719
In response to UPIA1968
Agreed, we have a lot going for us, and a lot of it is compelling. Harvard's name, recent success, and financial aid advantages already make it a winning formula. With Amaker's personality, reputed contacts, and diligence they have a deal closer with some of the top prospects. There are only so many of those that Amaker can fill his roster with, so there is room for Steve and others to comb the remainder of the field and pull in players of the caliber you mentioned. If our head coach had a personality that commanded a room the way Chuck Daly's did, or Fran Dunphy could do (I had personal experience with both), or Digger Phelps when he was our assistant coach under Harter, our recruiting would match up pretty evenlyHarvard's with Amaker, even if they might win a few more head to head contests. Dick Harter, Bob Weinhauer, and Steve Donahue ( full disclosure--I knew Dick and Bob from personal contact, but have only come to know Steve and his staff from many tv viewings and most recently Nat Graham's thought provoking article) all had success because they were great tacticians, oozed sincerity, and made their players believe. I have written before on this Board that any parent would be proud to have a son play for Steve and his staff because they are (or, at least appear to me, to be the real deal). Without having a big personality like a Daly or a Dunphy or Phelps, I am guessing that Steve can't walk into a living room , or communicate by Zoom, and sell a big-time recruit the way Amaker probably can, and then automatically clinch it with a campus visit.
I agree with your point that we need to get past the defeatism, however. Steve cleverly put together teams that beat Villanova, Alabama, Providence, Temple , Harvard (several times), Yale (several times), and others, so he ain't chopped liver. I'm happy with that, and I think many others are too. Next coaching cycle, things will change again, but for right now, Steve and his staff have at least brought back championship level basketball to Penn, and I am betting he'll sustain it. I know we all want it to be so, and the empirical evidence supports that contention. Let's get healthy, and if we do, will be right there crowing again.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1896
Reg: 11-29-04
|
06-08-20 11:56 PM - Post#308721
In response to pennsive
Yeah, I know many will think this is "settling" but I like Donahue and what he means for our program.
|
Quakers03
Professor
Posts: 12530
Reg: 12-07-04
|
06-09-20 12:27 AM - Post#308724
In response to pennsive
What kind of an impact does Nat have on recruiting?
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
06-09-20 09:20 AM - Post#308740
In response to mrjames
One final set of questions:
If Amaker could be replaced by an average coach and achieve similar results due to Harvard's institutional advantages, as has been supposed previously in this thread, how do you explain the unprecedented, continued success his program has had at outmaneuvering high majors for recruits? Does Harvard also have advantages over those programs?
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
06-09-20 09:34 AM - Post#308744
In response to mrjames
Yes. I think we always on these boards said that if the Ivies could give scholarships, they would have advantages over virtually any institutions because of the value of the diplomas. And Harvard has the best brand among the Ivies. Add to that the ability to offer anyone whose family income is under $150K a free ride and you have access to just about any player in the country. Add academic freedom that Amaker's predecessor did not have and you have a juggernaught.
However, Amaker has great communications skills and networking---I never minimized those attributes. I just believe what Harvard made available to him and him alone among Harvard coaches has more to do with his success than his ability. He clearly closes well, but then again, he has an unbeatable package to sell among his peers in the Ivies.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
06-09-20 10:12 AM - Post#308757
In response to palestra38
Let's take these one at a time...
Add to that the ability to offer anyone whose family income is under $150K a free ride and you have access to just about any player in the country.
I mean, there's a calculator on their website (https://college.harvard.edu/financial-aid/net-pri ce-calculator). I haven't found a way to get a completely free ride for anyone even over $100K. I don't think it helps the argument to continue to spew misinformation.
Add academic freedom that Amaker's predecessor did not have and you have a juggernaught.
This might have been true at the beginning of his time at Harvard (though still was not true relative to other Ivies, but that nuance always gets lost in this). But the AI floor has continually been increased to the point that its in line where Sullivan could fish for most of his tenure.
I just believe what Harvard made available to him and him alone among Harvard coaches has more to do with his success than his ability. He clearly closes well, but then again, he has an unbeatable package to sell among his peers in the Ivies.
Again, the question is not about beating his peers in the Ivies. The question is about high major programs. It seems that you are saying that he has an unbeatable package to sell against high major programs. Which... is... crazy...
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: 2021 Recruiting
06-09-20 10:30 AM - Post#308761
In response to mrjames
But true, and that is why it is happening. I don't mean to get personal on any of this but your rose colored glasses consistently ignore tautology. Amaker wouldn't be able to get top Power Conference talent unless Harvard was able to get that talent. Amaker gets it because it is possible to get it selling the Harvard brand. Give him credit for closing deals, but calling him a "Unicorn", i.e., he is one of a kind, is a very very subjective opinion. You are entitled to your opinion but on that subject, using the "Do You Know Who I Am" defense to counter disagreement is disingenous.
By the way, yes, there is a sliding scale from $100K to $150K so you have a small point there. I don't think that much matters with the recruits we are talking about.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
06-09-20 10:33 AM - Post#308762
In response to Penndemonium
So do I. I think I have been among the most optimistic posters about the coming years at Penn. The Harvard advantage only goes to recruiting head to head. There are more players than Harvard can get and the game is determined on the court. I was fully confident this past season that Penn would have beaten Harvard in the tournament. But we'll never know.
|
