time to go Al...

[Eagledom]

The idea that BC is any more prominent on the national scene, and thus more able to recruit than in the 1980s, is retarded.

the fact that OJ is making that argument tells you all you need to know.

I noticed that he stopped paying attention to this thread after my last two posts. He'll come back later and tell me to prove it and then say that he hopes I am not a lawyer.

I read your post and its not even worth a response....first of all because you can't seem to get the fact that the growth of national exposure for hoops in general is a given and has nothing to do with this argument. Second, you are probably too young to even really know what BC hoops reputation was in 1980. When you can actually stay on point I might take the time to refute your arguments. This one is old though, and people who are arguing are just doing so to be asses and don't have any valid points, so its been fun, but enough is enough.

I am old enough to have seen Jay Murphy play live. He was at BC until 1984. Next stupid point, please.

I didn't know 1984 = 1980.

[twballgame9]

The idea that BC is any more prominent on the national scene, and thus more able to recruit than in the 1980s, is retarded.

the fact that OJ is making that argument tells you all you need to know.

I noticed that he stopped paying attention to this thread after my last two posts. He'll come back later and tell me to prove it and then say that he hopes I am not a lawyer.

I read your post and its not even worth a response....first of all because you can't seem to get the fact that the growth of national exposure for hoops in general is a given and has nothing to do with this argument. Second, you are probably too young to even really know what BC hoops reputation was in 1980. When you can actually stay on point I might take the time to refute your arguments. This one is old though, and people who are arguing are just doing so to be asses and don't have any valid points, so its been fun, but enough is enough.

I am old enough to have seen Jay Murphy play live. He was at BC until 1984. Next stupid point, please.

I didn't know 1984 = 1980.

I didn't see him play in 1984 I saw him play in Spring of 1983. Regardless, is your contention that by 1984, BC had advantages that it did not have in 1982? or 1980? So there was a big jump by the winter basketball season of 1983-84 that made BC a latent recruiting powerhouse? Oops, your Flutie wiseass comment just took a big fucking fail, didn't it? Since Jay Murphy was in the Spring 1984 NBA Draft.

Congrats, Captain Non Sequitur, you have made an irrelevant distinction on an irrelevant point in an otherwise relevant argument. That's quite a feat.

[twballgame9]

Query for the lawyers on the board. Do I have to pay property taxes on OJ after this thread? Because the satisfaction of owning his pathetic ass isn't worth even the nominal expense.

[Eagledom]

The idea that BC is any more prominent on the national scene, and thus more able to recruit than in the 1980s, is retarded.

the fact that OJ is making that argument tells you all you need to know.

I noticed that he stopped paying attention to this thread after my last two posts. He'll come back later and tell me to prove it and then say that he hopes I am not a lawyer.

I read your post and its not even worth a response....first of all because you can't seem to get the fact that the growth of national exposure for hoops in general is a given and has nothing to do with this argument. Second, you are probably too young to even really know what BC hoops reputation was in 1980. When you can actually stay on point I might take the time to refute your arguments. This one is old though, and people who are arguing are just doing so to be asses and don't have any valid points, so its been fun, but enough is enough.

I am old enough to have seen Jay Murphy play live. He was at BC until 1984. Next stupid point, please.

I didn't know 1984 = 1980.

I didn't see him play in 1984 I saw him play in Spring of 1983. Regardless, is your contention that by 1984, BC had advantages that it did not have in 1982? or 1980? So there was a big jump by the winter basketball season of 1983-84 that made BC a latent recruiting powerhouse? Oops, your Flutie wiseass comment just took a big fucking fail, didn't it? Since Jay Murphy was in the Spring 1984 NBA Draft.

Congrats, Captain Non Sequitur, you have made an irrelevant distinction on an irrelevant point in an otherwise relevant argument. That's quite a feat.

No, that wasn't my contention....have you ever heard of sarcasm, jackass? Besides making idiotic points that don't even touch on the crux of the argument, you can't read or sense sarcasm???? I guess after schooling your ass with respect to your prognostications about Southern, Sanders, and Tuggle, you are just desperate to try to argue with me about anything. You lost the battle here, pal. I'm bored with your arguments because the stupidity in them has lost its humor now....

[twballgame9]

The idea that BC is any more prominent on the national scene, and thus more able to recruit than in the 1980s, is retarded.

the fact that OJ is making that argument tells you all you need to know.

I noticed that he stopped paying attention to this thread after my last two posts. He'll come back later and tell me to prove it and then say that he hopes I am not a lawyer.

I read your post and its not even worth a response....first of all because you can't seem to get the fact that the growth of national exposure for hoops in general is a given and has nothing to do with this argument. Second, you are probably too young to even really know what BC hoops reputation was in 1980. When you can actually stay on point I might take the time to refute your arguments. This one is old though, and people who are arguing are just doing so to be asses and don't have any valid points, so its been fun, but enough is enough.

I am old enough to have seen Jay Murphy play live. He was at BC until 1984. Next stupid point, please.

I didn't know 1984 = 1980.

I didn't see him play in 1984 I saw him play in Spring of 1983. Regardless, is your contention that by 1984, BC had advantages that it did not have in 1982? or 1980? So there was a big jump by the winter basketball season of 1983-84 that made BC a latent recruiting powerhouse? Oops, your Flutie wiseass comment just took a big fucking fail, didn't it? Since Jay Murphy was in the Spring 1984 NBA Draft.

Congrats, Captain Non Sequitur, you have made an irrelevant distinction on an irrelevant point in an otherwise relevant argument. That's quite a feat.

No, that wasn't my contention....have you ever heard of sarcasm, jackass? Besides making idiotic points that don't even touch on the crux of the argument, you can't read or sense sarcasm???? I guess after schooling your ass with respect to your prognostications about Southern, Sanders, and Tuggle, you are just desperate to try to argue with me about anything. You lost the battle here, pal.

It was easier to recruit in 1980 for BC than in 2010. I have made my case. I have yet to see your argument to the contrary. Discuss.

Or wait, Captain Non Sequitur, is your point that the arrival of Sanders Tuggle and Southern makes it easier for Al to recruit? Or is the fact that your epic failure in your fist attempt at sarcasm makes it easier for BC to recruit? Are those the points you want to make in support of your argument?

[twballgame9]

Shit, OJ declared himself the winner despite not making a point. I just don't know what to do up against such a formidable opponent. I am going to console myself with alcohol.

[EaglesTalon]

It was easier to recruit in 1980 for BC than in 2010.

but we didn't have Conte Forum and our amazing basketball facilities in 1980, so surely you jest.

[twballgame9]

It was easier to recruit in 1980 for BC than in 2010.

but we didn't have Conte Forum and our amazing basketball facilities in 1980, so surely you jest.

My bad. I forgot about those. I also forgot that the passionate fan base that BC has now didn't exist in 1980. I mean, the nerdification has done wonders for BC's hoop environment, right?

[EaglesTalon]

I also like how cadillac asked what's changed that makes recruiting at BC so much easier in the past 20 years, and OJ keeps pushing the date back further.

Eventually, he'll be arguing that it's so much easier to recruit a basketball player to BC now than it was in the 1700s.

[Cadillac90]

The idea that BC is any more prominent on the national scene, and thus more able to recruit than in the 1980s, is retarded.

the fact that OJ is making that argument tells you all you need to know.

I noticed that he stopped paying attention to this thread after my last two posts. He'll come back later and tell me to prove it and then say that he hopes I am not a lawyer.

I read your post and its not even worth a response....first of all because you can't seem to get the fact that the growth of national exposure for hoops in general is a given and has nothing to do with this argument. Second, you are probably too young to even really know what BC hoops reputation was in 1980. When you can actually stay on point I might take the time to refute your arguments. This one is old though, and people who are arguing are just doing so to be asses and don't have any valid points, so its been fun, but enough is enough.

I am old enough to have seen Jay Murphy play live. He was at BC until 1984. Next stupid point, please.

I didn't know 1984 = 1980.

I didn't see him play in 1984 I saw him play in Spring of 1983. Regardless, is your contention that by 1984, BC had advantages that it did not have in 1982? or 1980? So there was a big jump by the winter basketball season of 1983-84 that made BC a latent recruiting powerhouse? Oops, your Flutie wiseass comment just took a big fucking fail, didn't it? Since Jay Murphy was in the Spring 1984 NBA Draft.

Congrats, Captain Non Sequitur, you have made an irrelevant distinction on an irrelevant point in an otherwise relevant argument. That's quite a feat.

No, that wasn't my contention....have you ever heard of sarcasm, jackass? Besides making idiotic points that don't even touch on the crux of the argument, you can't read or sense sarcasm???? I guess after schooling your ass with respect to your prognostications about Southern, Sanders, and Tuggle, you are just desperate to try to argue with me about anything. You lost the battle here, pal. I'm bored with your arguments because the stupidity in them has lost its humor now....

Who says this anymore? Hell, what kind of loser would ever say this?

For the record; I can attest that Teddy never said those things. OJ may want to believe he said (wrote) those predictions but that is not the case.

[twballgame9]

I also like how cadillac asked what's changed that makes recruiting at BC so much easier in the past 20 years, and OJ keeps pushing the date back further.

Eventually, he'll be arguing that it's so much easier to recruit a basketball player to BC now than it was in the 1700s.

Funniest part about the whole thing is that my first post was just an answer to an innocent post asking whether the tourney was as big as it is now, and OJ recognized it as fertile rebuttal to his retarded point, and argued with it. It was only then that I threw my hat in the ring behind Caddy's point and noted that competition for athletes in hoop is 1000x (I probably shouldn't say this as OJ will say "prove it") then it was 30 years ago.

[Eagledom]

BC's best basketball recruits in the late 70s/early 80s:

Cobb = Connecticut
Bagley - Connecticut
Sweeney - New Jersey
Adams - Connecticut
Garris - Connecticut
McCready - New York
Barros - Massachusetts

From the 90s on:

Curley - Massachsetts
Eisley - Michigan
Smith - California
Dudley - California
Rice - Virginia
Bell - Minnesota
williams - Texas

Hmmmmm, I notice a trend here. Yeah, I guess the recruiting footprint really hasn't gotten any larger.

[twballgame9]

BC's best basketball recruits in the late 70s/early 80s:

Cobb = Connecticut
Bagley - Connecticut
Sweeney - New Jersey
Adams - Connecticut
Garris - Connecticut
McCready - New York
Barros - Massachusetts

From the 90s on:

Curley - Massachsetts
Eisley - Michigan
Smith - California
Dudley - California
Rice - Virginia
Bell - Minnesota
williams - Texas

Hmmmmm, I notice a trend here. Yeah, I guess the recruiting footprint really hasn't gotten any larger.

Non sequitur. The local talent at BC in the 80s was as good or better than the national talent at BC in the 90s and 2000s. If anything, that "evidence" does nothing other than to prove that it is harder to recruit, as the coaches have had to go further to maintain the talent level.

Not recruiting nationwide doesn't mean you can't. Recruiting nationwide doesn't mean you are (or even can) bring in better recruits.

This is an observation without a point. Typical for you. If the head coach of Iona gets on a plane and pulls in a 2* from Hawaii, does that mean that it is easier for him to recruit that in other years because he is pulling kids from all over?

Easy recruiting means not having to leave your backyard. Texas football has easy recruiting. In the 1980s, Big East teams in the northeast had easy recruiting - all the talent was here, and the best schools were located here.

Your evidence makes my point. Thank you.

[twballgame9]

Moreover, you point conveniently ignores the fact that the fallout of the DiPina/Tyler/Bradley admissions issue was that no one on the BABC AAU team was ever going to play at BC after 1997, Jermaine Watson notwithstanding. Al Skinner was unable to tap into his own backyard, where there has been a decent amount of talent over the past 15 years. Add to that the rise of UConn as a basketball power in the early to mid 90s.

This is too fucking easy.

[Eagledom]

Moreover, you point conveniently ignores the fact that the fallout of the DiPina/Tyler/Bradley admissions issue was that no one on the BABC AAU team was ever going to play at BC after 1997, Jermaine Watson notwithstanding. Al Skinner was unable to tap into his own backyard, where there has been a decent amount of talent over the past 15 years. Add to that the rise of UConn as a basketball power in the early to mid 90s.

This is too fucking easy.

Ops, try again.....looks like I win again. BC was a "local school" in 1980 and had nothing to draw from except for the northeast because of that. Failures to recruit locally in recent history proves nothing except recruiting flops by the coaches. The fact that we can recruit nationally now and we couldn't in 1980 is the point. BC has a bigger name nationally now than it did in 1980 and my post proves that...that ability provides a larger pool of talent to fall back on. Argument over.

[commavegarage]

[twballgame9]

Moreover, you point conveniently ignores the fact that the fallout of the DiPina/Tyler/Bradley admissions issue was that no one on the BABC AAU team was ever going to play at BC after 1997, Jermaine Watson notwithstanding. Al Skinner was unable to tap into his own backyard, where there has been a decent amount of talent over the past 15 years. Add to that the rise of UConn as a basketball power in the early to mid 90s.

This is too fucking easy.

Ops, try again.....looks like I win again. BC was a "local school" in 1980 and had nothing to draw from except for the northeast because of that. Failures to recruit locally in recent history proves nothing except recruiting failure. The fact that we can recruit nationally now and we couldn't in 1980 is the point. BC has a bigger name nationally now than it did in 1980 and my post proves that...that ability provides a larger pool of talent to fall back on. Argument over.

BC was a very good hoop program in the 80s with local talent. That must mean they couldn't recruit nationally.

BC was a very good hoop program in the 80s and 90s with national talent. That must mean it was easier to recruit.

The sky is unquestionably blue. That means someone must have painted it that color.

The world looks flat while you are standing on it. It must be flat.

I am getting the hang of this being retarded thing.


This argument is long over. It was a hell of a lot easier for BC to recruit in the 80s for the following reasons:

1. Less teams period.

2. Less teams in the bigger conferences that dominate recruiting (in particular the Big 10, ACC, Big East and Big 8 (now 12).

3. Less big conferences with good hoop talent (the PAC10, SEC and Big8/12 were dogshit)

4. The downswing of the few national powerhouses in those dogshit conferences (Kentucky, UCLA, Kansas other than one season)

5. The overwhelming and absolute dominance of BC's conference as the best in the country.

6. Sweet 16 and Elite 8 appearances in the early 80s.

7. Eagledom enjoys taking it ATM (royalties paid to AC)

8. The two best NBA players in BC history, John Bagley and Michael Adams.

9. The fact that because it preceded ESPN and the nationalization of college hoop, all of the best players were found within 600 miles of BC, in NYC, Philly, Boston, DC and points between.

10. As everyone here seems to agree, BC had better coaches in Williams and Davis.


I win.

[twballgame9]

:slapfight

I admire Eagledom's spirit, but he is getting hammered here. His "I win" sounds like Roberto Duran's "No Mas" (although I am evidently no old enough to remember that)

[Cadillac90]

Moreover, you point conveniently ignores the fact that the fallout of the DiPina/Tyler/Bradley admissions issue was that no one on the BABC AAU team was ever going to play at BC after 1997, Jermaine Watson notwithstanding. Al Skinner was unable to tap into his own backyard, where there has been a decent amount of talent over the past 15 years. Add to that the rise of UConn as a basketball power in the early to mid 90s.

This is too fucking easy.

Ops, try again.....looks like I win again. BC was a "local school" in 1980 and had nothing to draw from except for the northeast because of that. Failures to recruit locally in recent history proves nothing except recruiting flops by the coaches. The fact that we can recruit nationally now and we couldn't in 1980 is the point. BC has a bigger name nationally now than it did in 1980 and my post proves that...that ability provides a larger pool of talent to fall back on. Argument over.

You are fucking delusional. Big fucking deal that they had a bunch of local talent, try jumping to a conclusion more quickly next time. You keep changing this argument to fit your most recent post.

[EaglesTalon]

I can't believe OJ thinks he's winning this argument! Just another example of him being a contrarian dickhole who argues for the sake of arguing.

[twballgame9]

Moreover, you point conveniently ignores the fact that the fallout of the DiPina/Tyler/Bradley admissions issue was that no one on the BABC AAU team was ever going to play at BC after 1997, Jermaine Watson notwithstanding. Al Skinner was unable to tap into his own backyard, where there has been a decent amount of talent over the past 15 years. Add to that the rise of UConn as a basketball power in the early to mid 90s.

This is too fucking easy.

Ops, try again.....looks like I win again. BC was a "local school" in 1980 and had nothing to draw from except for the northeast because of that. Failures to recruit locally in recent history proves nothing except recruiting flops by the coaches. The fact that we can recruit nationally now and we couldn't in 1980 is the point. BC has a bigger name nationally now than it did in 1980 and my post proves that...that ability provides a larger pool of talent to fall back on. Argument over.

You are fucking delusional. Big fucking deal that they had a bunch of local talent, try jumping to a conclusion more quickly next time. You keep changing this argument to fit your most recent post.

Texas football has a lot of guys from Texas, so they must be a regional school that can't recruit nationally. See how that works?

[Eagledom]

Moreover, you point conveniently ignores the fact that the fallout of the DiPina/Tyler/Bradley admissions issue was that no one on the BABC AAU team was ever going to play at BC after 1997, Jermaine Watson notwithstanding. Al Skinner was unable to tap into his own backyard, where there has been a decent amount of talent over the past 15 years. Add to that the rise of UConn as a basketball power in the early to mid 90s.

This is too fucking easy.

Ops, try again.....looks like I win again. BC was a "local school" in 1980 and had nothing to draw from except for the northeast because of that. Failures to recruit locally in recent history proves nothing except recruiting flops by the coaches. The fact that we can recruit nationally now and we couldn't in 1980 is the point. BC has a bigger name nationally now than it did in 1980 and my post proves that...that ability provides a larger pool of talent to fall back on. Argument over.

You are fucking delusional. Big fucking deal that they had a bunch of local talent, try jumping to a conclusion more quickly next time. You keep changing this argument to fit your most recent post.

Good point...except that the ORIGINAL point to this whole fucking argument was that BC is much more of a national school now that it was in 1980, and that has translated into a larger pool of talent to draw from. Still the point, and its been proven. Thanks for playing.

[BCEagle74]

wow we sure have worked wonders with that talent pool expansion.

[Cadillac90]

Moreover, you point conveniently ignores the fact that the fallout of the DiPina/Tyler/Bradley admissions issue was that no one on the BABC AAU team was ever going to play at BC after 1997, Jermaine Watson notwithstanding. Al Skinner was unable to tap into his own backyard, where there has been a decent amount of talent over the past 15 years. Add to that the rise of UConn as a basketball power in the early to mid 90s.

This is too fucking easy.

Ops, try again.....looks like I win again. BC was a "local school" in 1980 and had nothing to draw from except for the northeast because of that. Failures to recruit locally in recent history proves nothing except recruiting flops by the coaches. The fact that we can recruit nationally now and we couldn't in 1980 is the point. BC has a bigger name nationally now than it did in 1980 and my post proves that...that ability provides a larger pool of talent to fall back on. Argument over.

You are fucking delusional. Big fucking deal that they had a bunch of local talent, try jumping to a conclusion more quickly next time. You keep changing this argument to fit your most recent post.

Good point...except that the ORIGINAL point to this whole fucking argument was that BC is much more of a national school now that it was in 1980, and that has translated into a larger pool of talent to draw from. Still the point, and its been proven. Thanks for playing.

The point has been proven wrong by about 5 or 6 different posters. BC started to gain prominence in 1984-85 and that didn't translate to any better recruits in the late '80s or '90s until JOB's class with Tyler et al. One top 10 recruiting class does not mean that it is easier to recruit. Three coaches, not just Skinner, have not been able to capitalize on this "prominence." Tell me this, what has Notre Dame's national reputation and prominence done for its basketball recruiting? How about Vanderbilt's?

[twballgame9]

Moreover, you point conveniently ignores the fact that the fallout of the DiPina/Tyler/Bradley admissions issue was that no one on the BABC AAU team was ever going to play at BC after 1997, Jermaine Watson notwithstanding. Al Skinner was unable to tap into his own backyard, where there has been a decent amount of talent over the past 15 years. Add to that the rise of UConn as a basketball power in the early to mid 90s.

This is too fucking easy.

Ops, try again.....looks like I win again. BC was a "local school" in 1980 and had nothing to draw from except for the northeast because of that. Failures to recruit locally in recent history proves nothing except recruiting flops by the coaches. The fact that we can recruit nationally now and we couldn't in 1980 is the point. BC has a bigger name nationally now than it did in 1980 and my post proves that...that ability provides a larger pool of talent to fall back on. Argument over.

You are fucking delusional. Big fucking deal that they had a bunch of local talent, try jumping to a conclusion more quickly next time. You keep changing this argument to fit your most recent post.

Good point...except that the ORIGINAL point to this whole fucking argument was that BC is much more of a national school now that it was in 1980, and that has translated into a larger pool of talent to draw from. Still the point, and its been proven. Thanks for playing.

Except you ignore that if BC left its backyard in 1980 it was leaving the most talent rich basketball area in American history - Boston-NY-Philly-DC corridor - to go into the hinterlands of high school basketball. In 1980, recruiting anywhere other than the Northeast was essentially

[EaglesTalon]

I'd like to get back to OJ's facilities argument. I can't believe there is someone out there retarded enough to think the Conte Forum today is a major selling point.

[twballgame9]

I'd note that Patrick Ewing lived in Cambridge.

I started listing all the greats of that era from the I-95 corridor. Then I realized it was easier to say "everyone but Barkley, Stockton and a dozen guys from Chicago."

[Eagledom]

I'd note that Patrick Ewing lived in Cambridge.

I started listing all the greats of that era from the I-95 corridor. Then I realized it was easier to say "everyone but Barkley, Stockton and a dozen guys from Chicago."

missing the point AGAIN.

[Eagledom]

Moreover, you point conveniently ignores the fact that the fallout of the DiPina/Tyler/Bradley admissions issue was that no one on the BABC AAU team was ever going to play at BC after 1997, Jermaine Watson notwithstanding. Al Skinner was unable to tap into his own backyard, where there has been a decent amount of talent over the past 15 years. Add to that the rise of UConn as a basketball power in the early to mid 90s.

This is too fucking easy.

Ops, try again.....looks like I win again. BC was a "local school" in 1980 and had nothing to draw from except for the northeast because of that. Failures to recruit locally in recent history proves nothing except recruiting flops by the coaches. The fact that we can recruit nationally now and we couldn't in 1980 is the point. BC has a bigger name nationally now than it did in 1980 and my post proves that...that ability provides a larger pool of talent to fall back on. Argument over.

You are fucking delusional. Big fucking deal that they had a bunch of local talent, try jumping to a conclusion more quickly next time. You keep changing this argument to fit your most recent post.

Good point...except that the ORIGINAL point to this whole fucking argument was that BC is much more of a national school now that it was in 1980, and that has translated into a larger pool of talent to draw from. Still the point, and its been proven. Thanks for playing.

The point has been proven wrong by about 5 or 6 different posters. BC started to gain prominence in 1984-85 and that didn't translate to any better recruits in the late '80s or '90s until JOB's class with Tyler et al. One top 10 recruiting class does not mean that it is easier to recruit. Three coaches, not just Skinner, have not been able to capitalize on this "prominence." Tell me this, what has Notre Dame's national reputation and prominence done for its basketball recruiting? How about Vanderbilt's?

Notre Dame is more nationally prominent now than in 1980?

[twballgame9]

I'd note that Patrick Ewing lived in Cambridge.

I started listing all the greats of that era from the I-95 corridor. Then I realized it was easier to say "everyone but Barkley, Stockton and a dozen guys from Chicago."

missing the point AGAIN.

Not really. You are having a little trouble with the concept of "cause and effect". BC didn't fail to recruit nationally in the 80s because they were a puny regional school that no one had heard of. They failed to recruit nationally because it would have been retarded to do so - all of the best talent was within 6 hours of driving time.