UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1121
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
02-10-24 12:58 PM - Post#362947
I took some time to look at the KP stats comparing three eras: Last 8 years of Fran’s talent, Miller/Allen, SD. Perhaps it is useful to restate the obvious.
Fran’s last eight years were spectacular. Penn ranked first in KP seven times and had the Ivy POY six times. His average national rank was 84, being under 100 seven times. Princeton at 155 rank was the only other Ivy below 2000. As my son famously said, Penn, Princeton and the six dwarfs.
Was there something special about the circumstances aside from brilliant coaching? Some data. Average Ivy rankings have improved. For the three eras in order: 220, 201, 188. How about the best teams? In order again: 83, 70,79. Number of teams to have the best ranking. 2, 4, 3. Number of programs to get below 100 rank in during the era: 2, 4, 2. Number of teams to get under 100 for a year: 9, 10,7. Conclusion: excellence is more dispersed, but the best teams are at historical levels.
Talent: Number of teams with POY: 4, 6, 4. Having the POY does not get you a championship by itself. Penn has had two in the Donahue ear and was fortunate to win one championship.
Coaching: Penn: Fran was a master, best coach in Ivy history. Donahue: had the run at Cornell, but has failed to replicate excellence since. Penn’s rankings by era: 84, 249, 159. League rank: 1, 7, 4, He has brought the program back from the abyss to mediocracy. Princeton: Each era has had excellence, except for Joe Scott. Rankings: 155, 144, 119. League rank: 2, 2, 2. That is very strong evidence of good management. Amaker had some run but has failed to sustain it. Harvard’s rankings: 245, 125, 155. League rank: 5, 1, 3. Joe Jones, started slow but has steadily brought the program up to sustained excellence. Rankings: 221, 173, 112. League rank: 3, 3, 1.
Seems to me there are two explanations for the situation at Penn. One is the combination of coaching and program management. I think it is mainly coaching. Fran excelled at Temple after leaving Penn. As to management - Fred Shabel was long gone by Fran’s arrival. Fran worked for Bilsky. I suppose Bilsky got money but not much else. The second explanation is that HPY troika is poaching on Penn’s recruiting. However, they all have gotten better, suggesting that the Harvard and Yale have figured out how to recruit. Princeton already knew how to do that. The talent pool is not a fixed pie. HPY rankings, 207, 147, 128. The bottom four have also gotten better since Fran’s departure. Ranking: 263, 229, 240. Penn is the ONLY program to have declined since Fran’s departure. Sure, he was sooooo good, it couldn’t be sustained. But to decline from number one to a boring fourth, and with poor prospects, not acceptable.
One final note: The current era stats include 2024, a year when Penn’s ranking is falling steadily. KP projects 4-10 in the Ivies, equal to Allen’s worst year. 1-13 is possible.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6413
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: State of the program
02-10-24 04:44 PM - Post#362976
In response to UPIA1968
An interesting statistical note — Donahue has a better overall record at Penn than he did at Cornell, fairly easily. I’d take 3 straight titles and a sweet sixteen over, as you say, boring 4th place finishes. On that point, I suspect I am stating the obvious.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3619
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: State of the program
02-11-24 01:58 PM - Post#363115
In response to SomeGuy
An interesting statistical note — Donahue has a better overall record at Penn than he did at Cornell, fairly easily. I’d take 3 straight titles and a sweet sixteen over, as you say, boring 4th place finishes. On that point, I suspect I am stating the obvious.
Another interesting statistical note. Coach Earl has Cornell currently sitting at KP Rating of 100. Not the end of the season yet, but that is 25 spots better than Coach Donahue has finished at Penn the entire 9 years he’s been here.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1900
Reg: 11-29-04
|
02-11-24 06:02 PM - Post#363133
In response to Mike Porter
Yes, it's hard to ignore that Earl seems to be a very good coach.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6413
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: State of the program
02-12-24 10:58 PM - Post#363159
In response to Mike Porter
Yes. Same thing. Consistent mediocrity with a better overall record vs. a lower overall record but titles/top 100 finishes.
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1121
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
02-13-24 04:46 PM - Post#363172
In response to SomeGuy
Some numbers to illuminate Steve's recruiting.
The Championship team featured 51% of the minutes from Donahue recruits. So the talent was recruited as much by Allen as by Steve.
The current team features two weak classes: Seniors account for 39% fewer minutes than is normal for men's college BB teams.
Seniors should be the most important cohort.
Sophomores account for 62% fewer minutes than is normal. That year should be a foundational year when players begin significant development.
Freshmen account for 98% more minutes than is normal. Penn is playing boys against men.
These stats show that Donahue's recruiting has frequent gaps. His program has had three decent years in eight recruiting seasons 2017, 2019, and 2023. So we are paying for the failures in between.
Note that, although this year's juniors are getting time, 34% more than normal, only Nic is a championship caliber player. Hollins, has the athleticism but not enough of the rest. Smith in tenacious but, in 27 minutes per game, is averaging 4 shots on .352 shooting (.281 form three), .5 offensive rebounds, and 1.5 assists. Those are NOT the stats of a championship player no matter how much heart he has.
Antonio Woods played a similar role but got basically twice the output in the same minutes - and CHOULD SHUT DOWN the opponent's best player. He was a championship player. Belcore was a similar player.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32840
Reg: 11-21-04
|
State of the program
02-13-24 05:19 PM - Post#363173
In response to UPIA1968
We SHOULD have a great senior class right now--Dingle, Martz, Slajchert and Spinoso. Yours is a bad argument that it was a poor recruiting year. 2 left, one got hurt and the other never was quite as good as his ability seemed to indicate he would become. But I'll take recruits on the level of those 4 guys every year. Got Laz as well.
|
nychoops
Junior
Posts: 243
Reg: 11-23-04
|
02-13-24 05:39 PM - Post#363175
In response to palestra38
i've gotten a few DM's asking what my issue with SD is, why i'm so critical. I have no personal issue with the man and yes he runs a clean program and by all accounts is a good man. But this is not a 8U team.. this is a once proud program and i have a long history( helped Hassan towards Penn) with and he is not a competent leader. He is a lazy apathetic recruiter with no eye for talent( yes if needed i'll tell the stories of how the better players ended up here) He has no in game acumen and this program will NOT EVER, EVER move foward with him at the helm. Trust me he is not taken seriously. If analytics, statistics, recruitment numbers say differently fine...I'm telling you from years in the game this will never improve as long as SD is the head basketball coach at the University of Pennsylvania
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1900
Reg: 11-29-04
|
02-13-24 08:17 PM - Post#363178
In response to nychoops
I'm inclined to believe what you say, nychoops. Don't take my peace and calm towards SD as a statement that you are wrong. It speaks more to the mindset I'm in towards college sports generally - and doubly so towards football.
On the margin if I were the AD, I'd probably make a change, but I'm not personally banging the table as a fan. Life is short.
I've found your viewpoints reliably accurate, so I really appreciate the insights you have contributed over the years. You have always been very neutral and balanced, so I can see that your disapointment with SD is substantial. Your viewpoint is further supported by the results.
i've gotten a few DM's asking what my issue with SD is, why i'm so critical. I have no personal issue with the man and yes he runs a clean program and by all accounts is a good man. But this is not a 8U team.. this is a once proud program and i have a long history( helped Hassan towards Penn) with and he is not a competent leader. He is a lazy apathetic recruiter with no eye for talent( yes if needed i'll tell the stories of how the better players ended up here) He has no in game acumen and this program will NOT EVER, EVER move foward with him at the helm. Trust me he is not taken seriously. If analytics, statistics, recruitment numbers say differently fine...I'm telling you from years in the game this will never improve as long as SD is the head basketball coach at the University of Pennsylvania
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1900
Reg: 11-29-04
|
02-13-24 08:20 PM - Post#363179
In response to nychoops
BTW nychoops, Hass played for Schneider. You would at least agree that Donahue is better than Schneider was? 
i've gotten a few DM's asking what my issue with SD is, why i'm so critical. I have no personal issue with the man and yes he runs a clean program and by all accounts is a good man. But this is not a 8U team.. this is a once proud program and i have a long history( helped Hassan towards Penn) with and he is not a competent leader. He is a lazy apathetic recruiter with no eye for talent( yes if needed i'll tell the stories of how the better players ended up here) He has no in game acumen and this program will NOT EVER, EVER move foward with him at the helm. Trust me he is not taken seriously. If analytics, statistics, recruitment numbers say differently fine...I'm telling you from years in the game this will never improve as long as SD is the head basketball coach at the University of Pennsylvania
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1121
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
Re: State of the program
02-13-24 10:39 PM - Post#363181
In response to palestra38
The missing players from this year are fifth year players when measured against their recruited year 2019. 2020 produced just Clark.
If you cite Dingle and Martz as bad luck, then you say the problem with the Penn program is bad luck. So all Steve needs is some luck?
Also Dingle and Martz's departures were voluntary. Sure the was more than just bad luck.
Edited by UPIA1968 on 02-13-24 10:43 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
nychoops
Junior
Posts: 243
Reg: 11-23-04
|
02-13-24 11:10 PM - Post#363183
In response to Penndemonium
HA!! Yes i will grant you that!! Tom was awful at Lehigh and worse at Penn.. and he had some talent here
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1900
Reg: 11-29-04
|
02-13-24 11:32 PM - Post#363184
In response to nychoops
BTW, I was sad that we lost Hass. He was the most popular guy on campus. I didn't know him well, but he was completely fun-loving in the few moments I spent with him. He really was coming into his own in his last season for Penn. He became a great rebounder and developed surprisingly quick moves in the post.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32840
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: State of the program
02-14-24 02:19 PM - Post#363191
In response to UPIA1968
Did I say it was bad luck? Donahue flatly blew it last year. Lost every game that they needed to win and were in position to win. The worst aspect of the team was that it didn't think it would win--exactly the opposite from what we see at Princeton and Yale. Had the talent then and lost. Doesn't have the talent now and is going down to a miserable season.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3619
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-14-24 05:24 PM - Post#363194
In response to nychoops
If analytics, statistics, recruitment numbers say differently fine...I'm telling you from years in the game this will never improve as long as SD is the head basketball coach at the University of Pennsylvania
Appreciate your insights as always. None of the analytics, statistics, or recruitment numbers say anything different from what you've just stated. The results and all that come with them, are in and agree with your statements. Anyone left who thinks otherwise, is just trying to convince themselves against all facts in front of them (though to be fair I don't see many disagreements at this point).
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6413
Reg: 11-22-04
|
02-14-24 07:22 PM - Post#363197
In response to Mike Porter
Do the results/analytics really show that Steve is lazy, incompetent, has no eye for talent, and has no in game acumen? I guess I have trouble coming to that conclusion based on a .535 winning percentage, making the Ivy tournament every year, etc. The analytics and performance say he is something more like mediocre in the mix of all these things. As nychoops points out, this is a once proud program. However, Steve’s not the one who lost that — it was the prior two coaches who did that. Steve has been an improvement over them. So I’m not sure Steve should get much blame, if any, for what the program has become. He’s actually moved it forward. Probably as far as he can and ultimately not far enough, but forward nonetheless.
All that said, I’m really just arguing that the analytics/results don’t actually back up those very negative assertions. Or if they do, the Ivy League currently has 5 lazy, incompetent coaches with no eye for talent or in game acumen.
|
Penndemonium
PhD Student
Posts: 1900
Reg: 11-29-04
|
State of the program
02-14-24 11:45 PM - Post#363208
In response to SomeGuy
The lazy label is a tricky one. I don't doubt nychoops has valid reasons to feel that way, but it's not something I've ever heard from anywhere else. Maybe... complacent? Passive? That strikes me as realistic. Yes, SD is obviously a way better head coach than his two predecessors. I hope no one questions that.
Edited by Penndemonium on 02-14-24 11:45 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1121
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
02-14-24 11:46 PM - Post#363209
In response to SomeGuy
There is no question that the program has improved over the dark ages, especially in terms of the treatment of the players.
As to basketball performance, here are some statistical cuts. Prior first, current second
Dances: 0-1
Championships 0-1 tied.
Top four 3-6
Ivy wins 52-60
Worst season wins 4-4 (2024 KP projection).
Steve is even odds to have a season worse than Miller or Allen's worst.
So, is performance better? Clearly better, but not a lot better. Steve has averaged one ivy win per year better than Allen/Miller. His best year is better than Allen's best but his worst year may be worse than Allen's worst.
Is that what Bilsky was thinking when he hired Steve - one more Ivy win per year?
Put differently: How much is good developmental and good game coaching worth? Probably more than one Ivy win per year, given the low starting point. If so then the Miller/Allen recruiting was at least as good as Steve's
|
slane
Freshman
Posts: 70
Reg: 02-09-05
|
02-15-24 12:00 AM - Post#363211
In response to Penndemonium
Jon conveniently ignores the 14 point lead with 5 minutes to go that Princeton blew at home last year against Yale in the regular season game that Princeton lost to Yale at Jadwyn. We could also question Princeton’s last minute meltdown in the ILT final against Yale at Payne Whitney the year before.
We have played the first six games of these season’s Ivy schedule without our best current roster player and the entire season without our #1 and #3 (potentially #2) anticipated returning seniors (Dingle and Martz) around whom Steve managed to recruit the #2 and #3 Ivy freshmen this year and 2 other freshmen who have the potential to be very significant contributors down the road.
No one should forget that the 2016-17 team opened its Ivy campaign 1-6 and still managed to earn the #4 seed in the initial ILT on the season’s last day with a 6-8 record. Despite all that, if Matt Howard converts his 1-1 with 11 seconds left we likely knock off 14-0 Princeton to get to the ILT final that year.
With 5 home games left, I will reserve judgment at least until after this weekend on whether it is time to bury this team and turn 100% of my attention to the only sport at Penn that still really matters which is lacrosse — the only remaining sport in which Penn can realistically aspire to an NCAA championship.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3619
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-15-24 01:24 AM - Post#363216
In response to SomeGuy
Do the results/analytics really show that Steve is lazy, incompetent, has no eye for talent, and has no in game acumen? I guess I have trouble coming to that conclusion based on a .535 winning percentage, making the Ivy tournament every year, etc. The analytics and performance say he is something more like mediocre in the mix of all these things. As nychoops points out, this is a once proud program. However, Steve’s not the one who lost that — it was the prior two coaches who did that. Steve has been an improvement over them. So I’m not sure Steve should get much blame, if any, for what the program has become. He’s actually moved it forward. Probably as far as he can and ultimately not far enough, but forward nonetheless.
All that said, I’m really just arguing that the analytics/results don’t actually back up those very negative assertions. Or if they do, the Ivy League currently has 5 lazy, incompetent coaches with no eye for talent or in game acumen.
Fair question, I should have been more specific. I have no idea the details one way or another around what nychoops said. I was personally reacting to the final comment, the ultimate results:
"this program will NOT EVER, EVER move forward with him at the helm. Trust me he is not taken seriously. If analytics, statistics, recruitment numbers say differently fine...I'm telling you from years in the game this will never improve as long as SD is the head basketball coach at the University of Pennsylvania"
We have 9 years of results, 8 seasons worth of data, 2 full recruitment classes worth of data. Mediocrity is the result, trending in the wrong direction for a long while. Nothing in the data disagrees with the idea that this is highly likely as far as this staff can take the program.
|
SteveDanley
Sophomore
Posts: 102
Age: 39
Reg: 02-25-12
|
02-15-24 11:19 AM - Post#363220
In response to Mike Porter
I'm going to cautiously dip my toe in here.
I've wondered a fair bit about whether some of the structural advantages that Penn had over the years have gone away for hoops. I'd imagine other folks know more, but when I was recruited to Penn, my understanding was Penn was both more flexible than most peer institutions with Academic Index and was able to "win" most head-to-head financial aid battles. I really had trouble affording to give up a scholarship and Penn really put together a fantastic package for me at the time.
My recollection is that the Amaker signing was conditional on them changing their AI approach and there hasn't been as clear an advantage there.
And in my talks with coaches (particularly on the Women's side -- where I think McLaughlin's trajectory shows some of the challenges competing at Penn) I know they have a really hard time competing straight-up with financial aid packages at schools with stronger endowments and policies around grants up to a certain family $ income.
I'm not close enough to the SD staff to have much of an inside scoop there. But I tend to be of the opinion that addressing the financial aid stuff to even the playing field (and obviously now it's weirder with NIL $s) is a big piece of the current recruiting approach.
|
CM
Masters Student
Posts: 424
Reg: 10-11-18
|
02-15-24 12:09 PM - Post#363221
In response to SteveDanley
The basketball recruiting world is tiny and once word gets around that a certain program does not have a good culture and that kids who go there do not have good experiences it gets exponentially harder to land coveted recruits. As the saying goes, Culture eats Strategy for breakfast.
|
palestra38
Professor
Posts: 32840
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-15-24 12:28 PM - Post#363222
In response to SteveDanley
I don't know that any Ivy schools dip into endowment to help pay for basketball expenses, other than to have a major donor endow the coach position and facilities. Penn does that. Not to the extent that Harvard went to pay Amaker and his wife and give them a house.
But whether it is the culture or the recruiting ability of the staff, the fact remains that the team is not where we want it to be.
|
SteveDanley
Sophomore
Posts: 102
Age: 39
Reg: 02-25-12
|
02-15-24 12:49 PM - Post#363224
In response to palestra38
I'm not saying they dip into endowments, but that the universities with larger endowments have ended up with more generous financial aid policies for the entire student body, which has changed the landscape for recruiting athletes.
Penn used to have a failsafe for this -- they could "match" official offers at other places for athletes. My understanding is that other schools have caught on and provide unofficial financial aid estimates rather than official offers to keep Penn from being able to match.
Again, I'm not up on the day-to-day of this. But I think this financial aid stuff has ended up being a big deal in recruitment.
|
slane
Freshman
Posts: 70
Reg: 02-09-05
|
02-15-24 07:17 PM - Post#363240
In response to SteveDanley
Not to diminish anything that Fran Dunphy accomplished during his 17 years as Penn’s coach, it is worth noting that despite sharing absolute domination of the Ivy League with Princeton during his tenure, Fran’s Penn teams won only 1 NCAA tournament game and only 1 outright Big 5 title (2001-02). Fran’s Penn teams won 3 other Big 5 titles, including a shared 2-0 title in 1993-94, and 5 team 1-1 ties in 91-92and 97-98 (during the first non-full round robin era). Fran beat Villanova 4 times (91-92, 93-94, 97-98, and 2001-02).
SD has beaten Villanova twice (2018-19) and (2023-24) and has won 1 outright Big 5 title (2018-19). He has yet to win an NCAA tournament game.
The reality is that Penn no longer dominates the Ivy’s because the rest of the league has gotten much better. Harvard, Yale, and Princeton have benefitted from the Ivyies being prevented to share the terms of their respective financial aid packages. It has been alleged that Harvard, Yale and Princeton have offered more generous packages. Penn in turn benefitted from an advantage over Columbia, Brown, Dartmouth and Cornell in that while its packages were less generous that those offered by the “big 3’s”, Penn implemented its no-loan/grant only policy before Columbia, Brown, Dartmouth and Columbia did. (I am uncertain as to whether each of those 4 have no loan policies in place even now.)
As for recruiting deficiencies, I am hard pressed to see where the team Penn expected to have this year - which would also have included Dingle and Martz - would have been iany less talented than that of any of Penn’s rivals. in fact Penn expected to field the most talented roster in the league.
Finally, as for coaching, the only Ivy coach who has distinguished himself above all others is in my view Brian Earl at Cornell given what he has accomplished with the talent he has assembled. And I again remind everyone that the Tiger nation was screaming for Henderson’s head after Princeton’s meltdown at home against Yale last year.
Everyone in this space needs to chill and let the second half of the Ivy round Robin play out.
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3619
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-15-24 07:18 PM - Post#363241
In response to SteveDanley
Hi Steve - hope you've been well and always great to have your insights.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if the financial dynamics have changed and one-time advantages may no longer be there. Certainly all of college basketball has changed and is continuing to change pretty rapidly.
But the only way to survive is to adapt, and that's true in any evolving situation or evolving market. The results currently are not only not at a level that fans hope for, but is actually trending downward as well.
The fan expectation isn't of the olden days of just Penn and Princeton champs, those days are long gone. But consistently 4th isn't going to cut it either. To put it in context for where we are... you were a senior on the last top 100 team Penn had, 17 years ago.
Now only 9 years of that is the responsibility of the current staff, but 9 years is a long time too.
It's good to understand what any coach might be up against and know it will be a challenge, but equally I see no indictions that the current staff can overcome said challenges if they exist. So for me, I come to the same conclusion.
Time for a change (note, that doesn't mean I think it will actually happen).
|
Mike Porter
Postdoc
Posts: 3619
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-15-24 07:30 PM - Post#363244
In response to slane
Not to diminish anything that Fran Dunphy accomplished during his 17 years as Penn’s coach, it is worth noting that despite sharing absolute domination of the Ivy League with Princeton during his tenure, Fran’s Penn teams won only 1 NCAA tournament game and only 1 outright Big 5 title (2001-02). Fran’s Penn teams won 3 other Big 5 titles, including a shared 2-0 title in 1993-94, and 5 team 1-1 ties in 91-92and 97-98 (during the first non-full round robin era). Fran beat Villanova 4 times (91-92, 93-94, 97-98, and 2001-02).
SD has beaten Villanova twice (2018-19) and (2023-24) and has won 1 outright Big 5 title (2018-19). He has yet to win an NCAA tournament game.
The reality is that Penn no longer dominates the Ivy’s because the rest of the league has gotten much better. Harvard, Yale, and Princeton have benefitted from the Ivyies being prevented to share the terms of their respective financial aid packages. It has been alleged that Harvard, Yale and Princeton have offered more generous packages. Penn in turn benefitted from an advantage over Columbia, Brown, Dartmouth and Cornell in that while its packages were less generous that those offered by the “big 3’s”, Penn implemented its no-loan/grant only policy before Columbia, Brown, Dartmouth and Columbia did. (I am uncertain as to whether each of those 4 have no loan policies in place even now.)
As for recruiting deficiencies, I am hard pressed to see where the team Penn expected to have this year - which would also have included Dingle and Martz - would have been iany less talented than that of any of Penn’s rivals. in fact Penn expected to field the most talented roster in the league.
Finally, as for coaching, the only Ivy coach who has distinguished himself above all others is in my view Brian Earl at Cornell given what he has accomplished with the talent he has assembled. And I again remind everyone that the Tiger nation was screaming for Henderson’s head after Princeton’s meltdown at home against Yale last year.
Everyone in this space needs to chill and let the second half of the Ivy round Robin play out.
Jordan Dingle and Max Martz were not meant to be seniors this year. Only because of COVID would they have been there if they so chose (and in fact they chose to not be here), them staying an extra year would have only helped mitigate the poor recruiting across several classes after them.
If they were here you'd see a lot less of Perkins and Brown (Dingle would have played every guard minute he could alongside Clark). I don't agree it would have been the most talented team. Would have been a lot better placed for sure, and in the conversation, but no clear winner for talent.
Genuine question. Let's say we win 6 out of next 7, get to 6-8 and sneak into a distant 4th place to make Ivy Madness. What does that tell you about the staff that makes it any more clear they can make a big jump as a program after 9 years of what we've already seen?
For me, personally would I feel a little bit better about it? Sure. Would it change the trajectory of the program currently as I see it? No, it would just be more of the same.
This is really the only stat you need to know. # of Top 100 Penn teams in the last 9 years = 0. No number of wins the rest of the season will change that.
|
UPIA1968
PhD Student
Posts: 1121
Loc: Cornwall, PA
Reg: 11-20-06
|
02-15-24 09:59 PM - Post#363247
In response to slane
Yes the league has gotten better and year after year championships are no longer possible. But, the team rankings against the entire country are worse, much worse. Maybe a sub 100 ranking might not win the league, as Fran usually did. But it is much better than the rankings this program gets now.
Further the Ivy champs of this era have similar rankings to the Penn/Princeton rankings before Fran left.
|
|
