UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1120
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
01-09-22 12:11 AM - Post#332904
I went back and looked at Donahue's recruiting and found this. Looking optimistically, he has had two good years: 2017 (Brodeur) and 2020 (Dingle); two other years with a ranked recruit: 2018 (Simmons) and 2019 (Wang); and a depth year in 2022.
When combined with good inherited talent (Woods, Foreman, and Max) the first good year won a championship. One hopes the 2020 class of Dingle, Martz, Monroe, Charles, and MLL will form the core of a second contender.
However, since the 2017 core peaked in its second year, the program has clearly regressed. Moreover, the core of the supposedly good 2020 team has shown no signs of excellence this year. Yes, the COVID mess has hurt, both in performance and recruiting, but the other Ivies have the same handicap.
Put a different way. Although the last four years of recruiting have produced seven or eight players of mid-Ivy competence, they have produced only one star in Dingle. And there appears to be no miracle coming to join the team next year in what looks like an alarmingly poor incoming class. In sum then Steve recruited three stars his first year, A.J. a remarkable star and two more in Betley and Dev. Since then he has produced but one in Jordan Dingle. This leaves us with the current roster of perhaps commendable depth, but without the talent that can pound a 345 team like Columbia, or realistically contend for a championship.
I hate to say this, but only Dingle of the current squad would get serious time with the talent that Steve inherited from Jerome. Fill in the names: DNH and Max up front, Howard on the wing, with Woods and Foreman sharing time with Dingle in the backcourt. Oh yeah, Hicks could have been on that team. One could make the same sad comparison with the Miller talent. It takes the blue snow of A.J. to produce any favorable recruiting comparisons between Steve and his two disastrous predecessors. Certainly, he has run a much more principled program, with some development successes. Still, that looks definitely like a principled program that, with some luck, squeaks into the Ivy Tournament some years. Obviously, that is good enough for the Administration. It is not good for me in a league where all but one of the other teams play in a high school gym.
Let me close by saying I continue to follow the team hoping for a miraculous turnaround. Sadly I apparently will have to keep doing that in a down era that now spans 16 years. Are two contenders in that time enough? Not for me.
By all means, respond to my pessimism with some comments that provide reasons to support my naive hopes. But please tell me how a team that is minus eleven offensive rebounds to a Ken Pom 345 team at home is going to suddenly find a pumpkin to turn into a royal chariot.
|
Chip Bayers
Professor
Posts: 7001
Loc: New York
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-09-22 12:34 AM - Post#332908
In response to UPIA1968
Guy who disappeared when the team won its first two league games suddenly has thoughts.
|
Buckeye Quake
PhD Student
Posts: 1601
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-09-22 11:43 AM - Post#332934
In response to UPIA1968
Development success? Who? Otherwise well stated.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-09-22 12:55 PM - Post#332944
In response to Buckeye Quake
Well, if you are going to say Steve isn’t recruiting any better than Allen and Miller, you have to account for the difference in performance somehow. Whether he is recruiting better or developing better, or something else, the overall results have been much better.
Now, whether they are better enough is a whole different question. The program isn’t where any of us want it to be (including Steve, I’m sure). But the fact he has moved the needle is clear.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1896
Reg: 11-29-04
|
01-09-22 12:58 PM - Post#332945
In response to Buckeye Quake
Foreman, Woods, Betley, Rothschild, and even Brodeur. Goodman also improved from a player who I thought would never play much. I’m neither calling for SD’s head or protecting it. But some players definitely improved under his watch. Some of those were JA’s recruits, but they never looked very good until SD.
|
pennsive
Junior
Posts: 200
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-09-22 01:03 PM - Post#332946
In response to UPIA1968
Columbia was too big and too quick for us-just like our out of conference schedule opponents. Throughout those games and this one, we have been out-quicked and out-rebounded. Columbia smelled blood on the water, and they played tight defense and exploited the mismatches. We can't rely on the three ball night after night, obviously, and a team that clamps down on us exposes our major weakness-a lack of healthy big men who can jump (even a little), defend, and score. That is a function of bad luck with the MLL injury and big man recruiting failures year after year. We do have athleticism on our bench, but this is at the small forward position. If they could help mitigate the problem, they would play. Steve isn't blind, so I assume, without any knowledge, that those players either were over-hyped coming to Penn, are too one-dimensional, have lingering injuries, haven't learned the plus well enough to fit easily into a team concept, or some combination of that. While one could say it is on them, in part that could be true, but in part , it has to be on the coaching staff. If we want to move beyond being a middle of the road Ivy team, and we all do, these things, top to bottom, need to be addressed quickly.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-09-22 01:08 PM - Post#332948
In response to pennsive
I think Columbia is pretty clearly the least quick and athletic of the Ivy teams we’ve played so far. Big, yes, particularly in terms of width.
|
nychoops
Junior
Posts: 240
Reg: 11-23-04
|
01-09-22 06:20 PM - Post#332981
In response to SomeGuy
Their have been recruiting failures with players that should currently be on this roster. I have made my opinion on the recruiting style of this current staff cryptically known. I have no history with SD and have heard he is a very good man, however my any means players, good talented Ivy eligible players have slipped through the cracks.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1896
Reg: 11-29-04
|
01-09-22 06:55 PM - Post#332983
In response to nychoops
BTW, what has happened to Ed Holland? I was hopeful that he would be a player - he seemed to be a high level recruit for us. I haven't seen him out there.
|
The Pine
Freshman
Posts: 61
Reg: 02-22-15
|
01-10-22 03:03 PM - Post#333010
In response to Penndemonium
I think the idea that Penn will be a team that resembled the 80s or 90s, well, those days are over whether Steve is there or not. The League and college hoops are different.
I have seen Columbia play in NYC and they are really terrible. Never would have guessed we'd lose, but Penn had a bad night. It happens. Still, the team is very young across the board. Look who wins every year, including when Penn won, it is stocked with senior talent. It makes a huge difference. The Penn nucleus is good, just very inexperienced. Hang on.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-10-22 03:56 PM - Post#333023
In response to The Pine
If CU is that terrible, how did they get off to a big lead at Princeton? They are a strong (i.e., big and physical)team and if you shoot poorly, they can beat you.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Donahue Recruiting
01-10-22 03:58 PM - Post#333024
In response to palestra38
If CU is that terrible, how did they get off to a big lead at Princeton? They are a strong (i.e., big and physical)team and if you shoot poorly, they can beat you.
It's not if, Columbia is terrible. It is a statement of fact, they are terrible. Ranked 345 out of 358 teams, and that's after beating us away.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-10-22 04:03 PM - Post#333025
In response to nychoops
Their have been recruiting failures with players that should currently be on this roster. I have made my opinion on the recruiting style of this current staff cryptically known. I have no history with SD and have heard he is a very good man, however my any means players, good talented Ivy eligible players have slipped through the cracks.
Thank you nychoops for your honesty and general approach here of sharing knowledge from your perspective.
|
andybech
Freshman
Posts: 80
Reg: 02-15-20
|
Donahue Recruiting
01-10-22 04:07 PM - Post#333026
In response to Mike Porter
I think it is possible for Penn to repeat what they did in the mid-80s and into the 90s. Note this draws a line somewhere in the early 80s when the sport became a bigger TV game and it became harder for an Ivy program to be a national program.
This probably means a program ranked in the 100-150 range but not much better than that nationally. It will be MUCH harder for teams to win 13 or 14 games in the league though because the rest of the league is better. Most specifically Harvard and Yale which previously had been also rans.
Top programs do include more recruits these days because players leave early, but the other side of the coin is that 4-year players that want an Ivy League education really have an incentive these days to figure out the financial aid side. The enhanced Ivy competition makes it harder to dominate, but I am not sure college basketball has changed that much when you limit the question to top academic programs that do not compete for NBA bound prospects.
Edited by andybech on 01-10-22 04:08 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-10-22 04:25 PM - Post#333029
In response to Mike Porter
They're terrible on a national level, no doubt--but so are we--we have proven that. I think the entire League is terrible. So what we are talking about is terribility on an Ivy basis. And there it is pretty clear that CU can beat anyone in this League if they are not shooting well.
|
10Q
Professor
Posts: 23360
Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-10-22 04:56 PM - Post#333033
In response to palestra38
Everyone sucks
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3618
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-10-22 05:01 PM - Post#333035
In response to palestra38
They're terrible on a national level, no doubt--but so are we--we have proven that. I think the entire League is terrible. So what we are talking about is terribility on an Ivy basis. And there it is pretty clear that CU can beat anyone in this League if they are not shooting well.
Haha, okay fair enough and I can't argue with that.
|
Stuart Suss
PhD Student
Posts: 1439
Loc: Chester County, Pennsylva...
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-10-22 05:26 PM - Post#333040
In response to Mike Porter
Ike Nweke, the reigning Ivy League player of the week, played in only 3 of Columbia's non-conference games.
That is not to say that Penn fans should not be disappointed in a home loss, but Columbia would not currently be ranked at Pomeroy #345 if Nweke had been available for the entire season.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-10-22 05:30 PM - Post#333043
In response to Stuart Suss
Of course, with no fans, the home court advantage is largely illusory. One thing that makes me shudder is playing almost all our home games in an empty building but coming back to playing road games before hostile crowds.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1896
Reg: 11-29-04
|
01-10-22 05:32 PM - Post#333044
In response to palestra38
I have not followed the other league teams closely, but CU really looked like the better team out there. They looked more physical and athletic, and they didn't look disadvantaged in skill. They executed their plays more crisply and out hustled us. It wasn't until the end with some Monroe defense that we looked like we might be the better team. Surprising that their Pomeroy is that low.
I'm willing to write off a loss due to a bad shooting day, but we weren't even creating great shots. I think our offense has a good design, but it is executed at 0.8x speed and the passes often aren't hitting their mark. I think playing the motion faster will actually open up better cutter separation and defensive confusion to make the passing better - but I don't think the team has the trust in each other yet. This doesn't seem to be a fully Donahue-ized team yet.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-10-22 05:39 PM - Post#333046
In response to Penndemonium
It's young, inexperienced, had a year off and then was forced to play far more talented and experienced teams for 11 games rather than develop confidence at our level. It was a tremendous mistake scheduling this way for this season--and all for a few bucks in one of the richest schools in the nation.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
01-10-22 07:15 PM - Post#333050
In response to Penndemonium
Good Columbia has appeared at times OOC. We saw them Saturday, they also appeared for the first half against Princeton. But bad Columbia has appeared a lot more, including the second half against Princeton. Bad Columbia can’t shoot and commits turnovers at an alarming rate. Bad Columbia could be worse than that overall 345 rank. This is why I would have liked to see us try to pressure the ball in the second half — to see if we could get them turning it over. We never made them uncomfortable, even when we eventually clamped down.
The reason Columbia shows such dramatic swings in performance is lack of experience. When they played OOC without Nweke, they were relying on guys with little experience across the board, with predictable results.
One frustrating thing is the performance of Shockley-Okeke against us. He is in and out of the rotation on the 345 team in the country. I’m not sure whether their staff even views him as a guy who would be playing if they had everyone healthy. And yet we couldn’t keep him from getting and hitting wide open 3s.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-10-22 07:45 PM - Post#333052
In response to andybech
If Penn is 100-150, we’re not going to win many Ivy titles — only in years where Harvard, Yale, and Princeton are all down. Steve actually got us into that range (or AJ did) for 4 straight years. Got to get into the top 100 in order to really be serious about Ivy regular season titles the way we were in the 90s and early 2000s.
|
Buckeye Quake
PhD Student
Posts: 1601
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-11-22 12:14 AM - Post#333070
In response to SomeGuy
It was AJ. With some help from some experienced backcourt teammates. If the recruiting continues at this rate, get used to being a bottom feeder until philosophical changes are made that might attract some talent. Whether that comes from this staff or another. From what I've seen and heard, I don't see it happening with this staff.
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1120
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
01-11-22 12:41 AM - Post#333073
In response to Buckeye Quake
It's time to quit using the improvement of Ivy teams as an excuse for Penn's mediocracy. Dumphy's teams were usually well below Pomeroy 100, a ranking determined by their entire schedule, a schedule that included some good competition.
If indeed the Ivy's are better then that would be reflected in Penn's ranking as well. No matter how one cuts it, the program since Fran's departure has slipped dramatically.
Sure Steve is better than the worst coach in program history. I like the way he handles his players - a classy guy. But the recruiting is clearly inadequate to return Penn to the level Franny achieved.
|
10Q
Professor
Posts: 23360
Loc: Suburban Philly
Reg: 11-21-04
|
 01-11-22 08:59 AM - Post#333083
In response to UPIA1968
It's time to quit using all excuses for Penn's mediocracy.
|
OldBig5
Masters Student
Posts: 639
Age: 66
Reg: 02-18-18
|
01-11-22 10:28 AM - Post#333086
In response to 10Q
What is crazier. Expecting one's team to always be on or neat the top or accepting mediocrity? Most college sports fans have unrealistic expectations. Not many programs that are always great. It's tough to compete against Yale, Harvard and Princeton-they have the name recognition amongst kids who are interested in an Ivy education.
Penn and Princeton dominating for so long was very unusual--I am happy they can compete now and seem to have a coach that runs a good program and is not a d***. The current team has a bunch of young guys on the floor at most times so think the rest of this year and the next couple should be fun.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32803
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-11-22 11:24 AM - Post#333090
In response to OldBig5
This is all ridiculous. While a few posters have complained about recruiting, most notably Jeff, this public mourning after losing to Columbia is just over the top. Our talent is just as good as any other team in the League, but it is YOUNG. You have no one who has played more than one season who gets any minutes. We lost our most athletic and promising big man....and that is the only position where the criticism of recruiting holds some weight. But this team will be right there at the end, mostly because no one else is capable of running away with the league, which lost 90% of its upperclass talent in the pandemic.
|
andybech
Freshman
Posts: 80
Reg: 02-15-20
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-11-22 01:47 PM - Post#333100
In response to SomeGuy
Nobody in the Ivies will be consistently better than that 100-150 range. Sure they will have good years and peak higher. Penn could do that too.
The Ivies generally have improved though nationally compared to 20 years ago because the rest of the league got better. That does not mean the top of the league is better relative to the country though. There are more good players and teams now, so there are lots of teams with top 100 aspirations.
In general though, COVID is not going to change much. The Ivies are a bit down this year because of the layoffs and transfers. But the value of the education is not going to go down and the advantage of keeping players for 4 years does level the playing field somewhat. Peaking at 100 is good for the Ivies. It is probably equivalent to peaking at 70-80 a couple of decades ago. There are just more teams and players (lots of international players) out there these days.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-11-22 03:11 PM - Post#333107
In response to andybech
The top team in the Ivy has been ranked outside the top 100 only one time since 2009. Agreed nobody is consistently top 100 — my point is just that the winner is (almost) always there.
Teams do it consistently for long stretches fairly regularly, though. Harvard was top 100 every year from 2011-2015. Princeton was 6 for 7 from 2011-2017. Yale is 3 for the last 5. And while Penn could do it — we haven’t since 2007.
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1120
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
01-11-22 10:11 PM - Post#333127
In response to SomeGuy
Yes, Penn is young, at 271 nationally for experience. Columbia is 326. I remind you that the Zoller nucleus ranked 73 when freshman and 77 as sophs winning the first of three championships. The Allen nucleus did the same thing, as he AJ nucleus won a championship as sophs.
As to overacting to a home loss to a 345 ranked team: The last time Penn lost a home game to a team in that region was under Glenn Miller.
|
CM
Masters Student
Posts: 418
Reg: 10-11-18
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-12-22 08:16 AM - Post#333135
In response to SomeGuy
Honestly, I do not understand how any Ivy basketball fan is comparing what happened before last year to what is happening now, especially when it comes to national rankings. Is it wishful thinking? Total ignorance? Something else.
So I'll try to be as clear as possible. Ivy programs entered this year with TWO classes that had never played a single college game before. TWO!
Even the upperclassmen had not played a competitive game in 18 months, during which time they had extremely limited access to gyms, trainers, and coaches. That Ivys can beat any non-conference teams is a freaking miracle, honestly.
So, please, spare me the historical KenPom references. You can throw that in the bin, it means nothing in the current atmosphere of Ivy basketball and the sooner you get your head around this the better supporter of Ivy basketball you can be.
|
Jeff2sf
Postdoc
Posts: 4466
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-12-22 08:43 AM - Post#333136
In response to CM
CM, do you recognize that Donahue was doing a crappy recruiting job beforehand? do you recognize that he is losing WITHIN the Ivies? Because if you're just going to apologize, not cut slack, apologize, then i'm not sure how productive the convo's going to be.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-12-22 08:56 AM - Post#333137
In response to CM
We were talking about the larger question of where Penn needs to be to win the league. Almost every year, that is top 100.
This year absolutely will be the second year since 2009 that the league winner is not in the top 100. The impacts of the year off on the league on the court actually haven’t been as great as I expected — while we don’t have any top 100 teams, we only have one bottom 100 team. I expected at least 2 and as many as 3 or 4, frankly. Any impact on recruiting would be more of a surprise to me, simply because a lot of what is happening throughout college basketball with numbers based on a couple of weird pandemic years actually should help the league, not hurt it.
|
CM
Masters Student
Posts: 418
Reg: 10-11-18
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-12-22 08:56 AM - Post#333138
In response to Jeff2sf
I am specifically addressing the relentless references to previous years' national rankings of Penn (and any other Ivy) and the unwillingness of commenters to address the fact that the Ivys as a group cannot be compared now to what they were then.
Edited by CM on 01-12-22 08:56 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
CM
Masters Student
Posts: 418
Reg: 10-11-18
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-12-22 08:58 AM - Post#333139
In response to SomeGuy
I can only assume you didn't read what I actually wrote.
And I really don't know why this is hard to understand.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-12-22 09:23 AM - Post#333142
In response to CM
I assume you did read what I wrote, but just didn’t understand it.
|
andybech
Freshman
Posts: 80
Reg: 02-15-20
|
01-12-22 07:18 PM - Post#333180
In response to SomeGuy
There are two questions here. First, is Penn any good and the answer is they are really a .500 team now for various reasons (recruiting, injuries, etc.).
There is a second question of how good are the Ivies and the whole league is down a bit temporarily because of COVID. Skipping a year when nobody else did is a big disadvantage (plus the net transfers to other programs). I guess whether the Ivies will continue to have a disadvantage because of COVID is a 3rd question. I think that is unlikely (even if I undershot the top of the league rankings a bit).
The whole league took a year off however and Penn in particular has been hurt because significant players (Williams, Charles, Wang) missed even more time because of injuries. We'll probably need to get to next year to start seeing how good the league is again.
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1120
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
01-12-22 11:23 PM - Post#333194
In response to andybech
My references to history apply to the Pre-covid Donahue teams as well as the post-covid teams. Franny set the standard for contemporary Penn basketball, virus or no.
Okay, I acknowledge that the lockouts may have caused the Towson and LaSalle losses. But in January of 2022, the problems relate to Penn's relative position within the Ivies. Ivy apples to Ivy apples: they rank fifth, in a league of eight. In Fran's time at Penn, his worst years were 2 thirds and a fourth, against 4 seconds and 10 firsts. Steve has bettered fourth once despite having the best big man in program history. If the difference is the improvement of the rest of the league, please explain why that general Ivy BBall improvement exactly coincided with Fran's departure and why Penn has declined, not to one of the contenders but to a second division regular?
No matter how one slices it, the program has regressed, with no current signs of a return to regular contention. I keep following the team in hopes that this will change. Let's just recognize that the current trajectory leaves the program mired in mediocracy.
And don't tell me that Penn can't aspire to excellence despite the insurmountable advantages of HYP. Does not Dartmouth regularly contend in football? They have finished tied for first in 3 of the last 6 years including the last two. Any Ivy school can win championships like Cornell in wrestling, Brown in Hockey, Columbia in fencing, and what Penn used to do in Football and BBall.
HYP have always emphasized football. That didn't phase Berndt, Zubrow, or Bagnoli. This year Penn finished last in football. What changed? The coaching of course - especially the lack of recruiting. Maybe such coaching leverage is more extreme in the non-HYPs. Still, Penn has regularly found excellent coaching in basketball and football in past. It is clear Penn does not have that in football, and, sadly, increasingly likely the same for basketball.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Donahue Recruiting
01-12-22 11:45 PM - Post#333195
In response to UPIA1968
I shouldn’t help you with your argument, since I disagree with quite a bit of it, but . . . the loss to Columbia dropped us to 6th in Pomeroy right now. So we managed to beat Cornell by 14 and the same weekend they still passed us in the rankings.
However, on the second division thing, since Steve took over we have finished in the second division one time — his first year, when we finished 5th. We’ve been top 4 every year since. Where we are in Pomeroy right now gives us a very reasonable chance to finish in the top 4 again this year. So I wouldn’t call us a second division team by any stretch. Under Steve, we’re a first division team 4 times out of 5. Obviously the Allen and Miller years are another matter.
Edited by SomeGuy on 01-12-22 11:48 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
andybech
Freshman
Posts: 80
Reg: 02-15-20
|
01-13-22 12:36 PM - Post#333200
In response to UPIA1968
I never said Penn can't inspire to excellence because of HYP. The reality though is that it is more difficult to be consistently excellent when there is more competition. Penn has history and facilities on its side, but the competition has unique national academic standing on its side.
Penn is clearly worse than in the Dunphy years. And our success has been limited because of bad luck with injuries. So Penn can be better. I think it will just be much harder in the future to be consistently dominant or part of a top 2 simply because there are now 4 good long term programs (and the bottom of the league is better than it was in the 1980s too).
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1120
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-13-22 10:17 PM - Post#333250
In response to SomeGuy
By 'second division" team, I mean a non-contender, middle team 3-6 in the rankings.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6404
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-13-22 11:12 PM - Post#333254
In response to UPIA1968
Fair enough. The term’s use generally comes from baseball, where in the old pre-divisional days of MLB a “second division” team was a team in the bottom half of the standings. So that was what got me thinking “Penn isn’t THAT bad.”
|
LyleGold
PhD Student
Posts: 1712
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: Donahue Recruiting
01-15-22 06:41 PM - Post#333356
In response to SomeGuy
My reaction exactly. “Second Division” is an old baseball term. As a long suffering Washington Senators fan, I never enjoyed a first division finish. Ted Williams led them to the only winning record of my lifetime in 1969, but that was the first year of divisional play, rendering the term obsolete.
If you apply it to the Ivy League, it’s synonymous with qualifying for the ILT. I see us as a first division team, but not really a contender for a league title, which officially means winning the regular season.
|
