Womens BBall coach turns down WNIT bid

[EaglesTalon]

The main problem with Skinner is that he recruits with the same effort as a coach at a school that HAS won a recent national title. The recruits don't come to BC. We have to go out and get them so Skinner's "cool if you want to come / who gives a shit if you don't" routine doesn't work.

What evidence do you have that he's not trying or doesn't care?

[branchinator]

The main problem with Skinner is that he recruits with the same effort as a coach at a school that HAS won a recent national title. The recruits don't come to BC. We have to go out and get them so Skinner's "cool if you want to come / who gives a shit if you don't" routine doesn't work.

What evidence do you have that he's not trying or doesn't care?

I never said he isn't trying or doesn't care.

[EaglesTalon]

The main problem with Skinner is that he recruits with the same effort as a coach at a school that HAS won a recent national title. The recruits don't come to BC. We have to go out and get them so Skinner's "cool if you want to come / who gives a shit if you don't" routine doesn't work.

What evidence do you have that he's not trying or doesn't care?

I never said he isn't trying or doesn't care.

"cool if you want to come / who gives a shit if you don't" - sounds like isn't trying/doesn't care to me.

[branchinator]

The main problem with Skinner is that he recruits with the same effort as a coach at a school that HAS won a recent national title. The recruits don't come to BC. We have to go out and get them so Skinner's "cool if you want to come / who gives a shit if you don't" routine doesn't work.

What evidence do you have that he's not trying or doesn't care?

I never said he isn't trying or doesn't care.

"cool if you want to come / who gives a shit if you don't" - sounds like isn't trying/doesn't care to me.

Nope. It means that he won't stroke the egos of the recruits, which unfortunately is a necessary evil in the business. Troy Bell talked about this pertaining to Skinner's style of recruiting.

[Eagledom]

There are PLENTY of schools with high academic standards that do well in hoops

name them.

Duke
Georgetown
Stanford
Vanderbilt
Notre Dame
UCLA
USC
Michigan
UNC
Wake Forest

All of these schools are ranked ahead of BC in the latest US News and World Reports.

First of all, I think you need to throw out any state school. Second of all: Georgetown and USC? LOL! Literacy is not a requirement to play basketball at those two schools.

Have you ever heard of Scoonie Penn? He couldn't read or write, yet, was admitted to BC.

he wouldn't be since jobias was fired... that's an unfair comparison

Academics isn't a selling point to 80% of recruits, but there are a ton of schools that do just fine while not using it as an excuse. Add Villanova to the list above. Not to mention the fact that BC does not hold athletes to the same academic standards as the rest of the population despite what many of you like to believe. Tyrese Rice was no rocket scientist. These excuses for Al are pathetic. The fact is that he does not sell the school or recruit hard. There's something to be said for not kissing an 18 year old's ass, but you also have to still try to sell BC to him. Al dosn't do that and his recruiting over the past 6 years has sucked as a result. To deny that his rcruiting sucks over this tim period is to be completely blind.

[EaglesTalon]

The fact is that he does not recruit hard.

link?

[commavegarage]

The fact is that he does not recruit hard.

link?

FWIW, I think it's become evident throughout the years that Al puts a huge burden on his assistants to bring recruits to his office.

[bignick33]

Tyrese Rice was no rocket scientist.

What proof of this do you have?

[EaglesTalon]

Tyrese Rice was no rocket scientist.

What proof of this do you have?

BC does not have a rocket science program. OJ was clearly being literal.

[BCEagle74]

1-ALSLEEP mentioned it himself that certain type of kids have to want to come here ----and I posted many times how the times have changed and kids want the National TV spotlight hat traick special. Al waits for them to call or express interest is a program destined for NiT failure.

We are now there.

Alsleep is lazy.

2--His assistant are doing more and moe recruiting and that speaks volumes since we have idiot x and o assistant coaches and bad recruiters....and when some superstar kid sees ALSLLEP back in his Yawkey Tower, why the fuck would he come here if the Coach can't come talk to Mama in the kitchen?

3--After Dudley, and a huge DONUT in 2010 for an ACC Team recruiting, how do you justify ALSLEEP existence?

Who were this years 2 star freshman?

How was the development of our younger players?

Did the flex fit the team's personnel?

Do big time recruits want to play half court slow down 1962 Flex basketball or did we go back to Hickory Indiana?

4--Crawley gets a pass with the NIT move, but with that load of talent, she needs to make the Elite 8 and then bust a Final 4 move in the next 3 years.

5--ALSLEEP needs to

[bignick33]

Tyrese Rice was no rocket scientist.

What proof of this do you have?

BC does not have a rocket science program. OJ was clearly being literal.

Phew. I was concerned someone was gonna have to post that black boy gif.

[pick6pedro]

There's still something that no one has come up with a decent explanation for: why is it that Al's (possibly) best recruiting class on paper, the one built off the momentum of those talented teams from 2000-2006, is possibly one of the worst teams he has had? Anyone? Step up to the mike.

[Eagledom]

There's still something that no one has come up with a decent explanation for: why is it that Al's (possibly) best recruiting class on paper, the one built off the momentum of those talented teams from 2000-2006, is possibly one of the worst teams he has had? Anyone? Step up to the mike.

because those players suck. It has nothing to do with "on paper". I could see from day 1 that Southern sucked. Al should have been able to see that too.

not to mention the fact that al is not a very good coach, can't motivate players, and can't develop them. He doesn't have the assistants to pull in the Dudley's, Bell's, and Snith's anymore...not to mention that they all actually cared.

[pick6pedro]

There's still something that no one has come up with a decent explanation for: why is it that Al's (possibly) best recruiting class on paper, the one built off the momentum of those talented teams from 2000-2006, is possibly one of the worst teams he has had? Anyone? Step up to the mike.

because those players suck. It has nothing to do with "on paper". I could see from day 1 that Southern sucked. Al should have been able to see that too.

You missed the point completely.

[Eagledom]

There's still something that no one has come up with a decent explanation for: why is it that Al's (possibly) best recruiting class on paper, the one built off the momentum of those talented teams from 2000-2006, is possibly one of the worst teams he has had? Anyone? Step up to the mike.

because those players suck. It has nothing to do with "on paper". I could see from day 1 that Southern sucked. Al should have been able to see that too.

You missed the point completely.

easy to do when there is no point

not to mention al has never "built on anything"....he proved he can't take BC anywhere of note and that the sweet 16 is his pinnacle.

[pick6pedro]

easy to do when there is no point

Then why did you answer? Ohhhhhhhhhhhh...J. The part you added after I quoted is a start, but not nearly enough to explain it away as you tend try to do.

[Eagledom]

easy to do when there is no point

Then why did you answer? Ohhhhhhhhhhhh...J. The part you added after I quoted is a start, but not nearly enough to explain it away as you tend try to do.

a so-socoach and so-so players is plenty of explanation...and this coming from the guy who thinks our talent was awesome this year

[pick6pedro]

easy to do when there is no point

Then why did you answer? Ohhhhhhhhhhhh...J. The part you added after I quoted is a start, but not nearly enough to explain it away as you tend try to do.

a so-socoach and so-so players is plenty of explanation...and this coming from the guy who thinks our talent was awesome this year

I'm just going to start calling you Dom Hyperbole. So sad.

[branchinator]

There's still something that no one has come up with a decent explanation for: why is it that Al's (possibly) best recruiting class on paper, the one built off the momentum of those talented teams from 2000-2006, is possibly one of the worst teams he has had? Anyone? Step up to the mike.

Two can play that game. In the 2004-2005 season, BC started out like 20-0 and had several high profile games. The 2006 recruiting class was Daye Kaba, Tyler Roche, and Shamari Spears. Care to step up to the mike and explain that recruiting effort? This was after a stretch in which BC made the NCAA Tournament 4 times in 5 years. If you want to know why BC was fucked as soon as *** ******* acted up in 2006-2007, it was because Skinner brought in a giant zero in the previous class.

[BCEagle74]

Southern was a good Texas player but he had serious issues in big HS games and disappeared. he was not recruited since he was low level talent.

[bignick33]

Southern was a good Texas player but he had serious issues in big HS games and disappeared. he was not recruited since he was low level talent.

Do you mean *** *******? Southern is from Michigan and was recruited by many teams including Kentucky and Michigan State.

[pick6pedro]

There's still something that no one has come up with a decent explanation for: why is it that Al's (possibly) best recruiting class on paper, the one built off the momentum of those talented teams from 2000-2006, is possibly one of the worst teams he has had? Anyone? Step up to the mike.

Two can play that game. In the 2004-2005 season, BC started out like 20-0 and had several high profile games. The 2006 recruiting class was Daye Kaba, Tyler Roche, and Shamari Spears. Care to step up to the mike and explain that recruiting effort? This was after a stretch in which BC made the NCAA Tournament 4 times in 5 years. If you want to know why BC was fucked as soon as *** ******* acted up in 2006-2007, it was because Skinner brought in a giant zero in the previous class.

This is part of my point. Kaba was offered by USC. Roche was offered by Georgetown, NCSU, VT, GW, UMass, PC. Spears was offered by Nova, SJU, VT.

You've missed the point entirely too, so I guess I have to spell it out. Before then BC was getting guys whose offers were mainly from TCU, North Texas, Tulsa, Tulane, Duquesne, Robert Morris, Ohio, Bowling Green, Dayton, Ball State (to name a few) or completely non-existent offers. Yet after the successes, guys who had a heavier offer sheet came in and did shit (include Sanders, Southern, Paris, and Raji). THAT'S what I'm asking about. It's ironic that Al has had more success with the "lesser" recruits.

[DaveSpeed]

Lesser recruits...the good ole days...http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/rvp/pubaf/chro ... inner.html

[branchinator]

There's still something that no one has come up with a decent explanation for: why is it that Al's (possibly) best recruiting class on paper, the one built off the momentum of those talented teams from 2000-2006, is possibly one of the worst teams he has had? Anyone? Step up to the mike.

Two can play that game. In the 2004-2005 season, BC started out like 20-0 and had several high profile games. The 2006 recruiting class was Daye Kaba, Tyler Roche, and Shamari Spears. Care to step up to the mike and explain that recruiting effort? This was after a stretch in which BC made the NCAA Tournament 4 times in 5 years. If you want to know why BC was fucked as soon as *** ******* acted up in 2006-2007, it was because Skinner brought in a giant zero in the previous class.

This is part of my point. Kaba was offered by USC. Roche was offered by Georgetown, NCSU, VT, GW, UMass, PC. Spears was offered by Nova, SJU, VT.

You've missed the point entirely too, so I guess I have to spell it out. Before then BC was getting guys whose offers were mainly from TCU, North Texas, Tulsa, Tulane, Duquesne, Robert Morris, Ohio, Bowling Green, Dayton, Ball State (to name a few) or completely non-existent offers. Yet after the successes, guys who had a heavier offer sheet came in and did shit (include Sanders, Southern, Paris, and Raji). THAT'S what I'm asking about. It's ironic that Al has had more success with the "lesser" recruits.

This is an easy question. The "lesser" recruits such as Bell, Dudley, and Smith were all extremely hard workers with an intense desire to improve in the offseason. Do you see that same quality in any of the Sanders/Southern/Paris/Raji/Dunn group? Have you ever once thought to yourself, "wow Player X does (name basketball skill) so much better this year"? No. A coach can only do so much.

[pick6pedro]

This is an easy question. The "lesser" recruits such as Bell, Dudley, and Smith were all extremely hard workers with an intense desire to improve in the offseason. Do you see that same quality in any of the Sanders/Southern/Paris/Raji/Dunn group? Have you ever once thought to yourself, "wow Player X does (name basketball skill) so much better this year"? No. A coach can only do so much.

If it was so easy, then why did I have to spell it out for you? You still haven't fully grasped what I'm getting at anyway. So I'll continue to walk you through it.

People complain that Al doesn't bring in top recruits early in his career. Before he only brought in average or below average recruits who (according to your answer that I knew you or someone else would say) have the drive and desire to succeed, which is why they do end up succeeding (not to mention other possible reasons - i.e. team chemistry, knowing roles, accepting roles, better responses to Al's carefree attitude in-game, Al actually trying, etc). But then when he brings in higher rated recruits - the team does worse. And people still continue to complain that Al isn't brining in the level of talent he should despite the higher recruiting rankings and better offer sheets. See the contradiction I'm pointing out?

[Eagledom]

This is an easy question. The "lesser" recruits such as Bell, Dudley, and Smith were all extremely hard workers with an intense desire to improve in the offseason. Do you see that same quality in any of the Sanders/Southern/Paris/Raji/Dunn group? Have you ever once thought to yourself, "wow Player X does (name basketball skill) so much better this year"? No. A coach can only do so much.

If it was so easy, then why did I have to spell it out for you? You still haven't fully grasped what I'm getting at anyway. So I'll continue to walk you through it.

People complain that Al doesn't bring in top recruits early in his career. Before he only brought in average or below average recruits who (according to your answer that I knew you or someone else would say) have the drive and desire to succeed, which is why they do end up succeeding (not to mention other possible reasons - i.e. team chemistry, knowing roles, accepting roles, better responses to Al's carefree attitude in-game, Al actually trying, etc). But then when he brings in higher rated recruits - the team does worse. And people still continue to complain that Al isn't brining in the level of talent he should despite the higher recruiting rankings and better offer sheets. See the contradiction I'm pointing out?

This is a purely anecdotal argument and its idiotic. You are basically arguing that Al will take the highest "rated" players he can regardless of whether he thinks they can play and that has burned BC over the last few years. This is so off point its ridiculous. The argument about his shit recruiting over the past 6 years has NOTHING to do with star ratings...its all about being able to identify players that will be successful at the college level - and Al simply has FAILED at that, regardelss of whether the the players were 1 star or 4 star...it really doesn't matter.

[pick6pedro]

This is a purely anecdotal argument and its idiotic. You are basically arguing that Al will take the highest "rated" players he can regardless of whether he thinks they can play and that has burned BC over the last few years. This is so off point its ridiculous. The argument about his shit recruiting over the past 6 years has NOTHING to do with star ratings...its all about being able to identify players that will be successful at the college level - and Al simply has FAILED at that, regardelss of whether the the players were 1 star or 4 star...it really doesn't matter.

Leave it to OJ to produce a cool breeze as he swings and misses. I said this exact same thing, but pointed out the irony in the rankings of the recruits being flip-flopped with success and how people easily confuse or blame one on the other. I'm not saying stars "matter", you imbecile. Instead of just saying "Al failed, hang him from the nearest tree", I asked why this has occurred (with some possible answers in mind). Clearly, too intellectual a conversation for you though. STFU Domino.

[branchinator]

This is an easy question. The "lesser" recruits such as Bell, Dudley, and Smith were all extremely hard workers with an intense desire to improve in the offseason. Do you see that same quality in any of the Sanders/Southern/Paris/Raji/Dunn group? Have you ever once thought to yourself, "wow Player X does (name basketball skill) so much better this year"? No. A coach can only do so much.

If it was so easy, then why did I have to spell it out for you? You still haven't fully grasped what I'm getting at anyway. So I'll continue to walk you through it.

People complain that Al doesn't bring in top recruits early in his career. Before he only brought in average or below average recruits who (according to your answer that I knew you or someone else would say) have the drive and desire to succeed, which is why they do end up succeeding (not to mention other possible reasons - i.e. team chemistry, knowing roles, accepting roles, better responses to Al's carefree attitude in-game, Al actually trying, etc). But then when he brings in higher rated recruits - the team does worse. And people still continue to complain that Al isn't brining in the level of talent he should despite the higher recruiting rankings and better offer sheets. See the contradiction I'm pointing out?

As OJ mentioned, your point is fucking stupid. There are so many factors that impact how a team does and you're trying to make a direct connection that isn't there. Like I said, Al's teams in the early part of this decade were better because the key players worked hard to improve their game whereas I haven't seen any improvement in 3 years from any of your "better" recruits from the class of 2007.

Your "contradiction" is a moronic argument that is tangential to a discussion on Al's recruiting efforts. Just because one "higher rated" recruiting class didn't live up to expectations doesn't mean that Al's teams with "lesser" recruits will always out-perform Al's teams with "greater" recruits.

As I mentioned before, your point is stupid and not worth discussing.

[pick6pedro]

This is an easy question. The "lesser" recruits such as Bell, Dudley, and Smith were all extremely hard workers with an intense desire to improve in the offseason. Do you see that same quality in any of the Sanders/Southern/Paris/Raji/Dunn group? Have you ever once thought to yourself, "wow Player X does (name basketball skill) so much better this year"? No. A coach can only do so much.

If it was so easy, then why did I have to spell it out for you? You still haven't fully grasped what I'm getting at anyway. So I'll continue to walk you through it.

People complain that Al doesn't bring in top recruits early in his career. Before he only brought in average or below average recruits who (according to your answer that I knew you or someone else would say) have the drive and desire to succeed, which is why they do end up succeeding (not to mention other possible reasons - i.e. team chemistry, knowing roles, accepting roles, better responses to Al's carefree attitude in-game, Al actually trying, etc). But then when he brings in higher rated recruits - the team does worse. And people still continue to complain that Al isn't brining in the level of talent he should despite the higher recruiting rankings and better offer sheets. See the contradiction I'm pointing out?

As OJ mentioned, your point is fucking stupid. There are so many factors that impact how a team does and you're trying to make a direct connection that isn't there. Like I said, Al's teams in the early part of this decade were better because the key players worked hard to improve their game whereas I haven't seen any improvement in 3 years from any of your "better" recruits from the class of 2007.

Your "contradiction" is a moronic argument that is tangential to a discussion on Al's recruiting efforts. Just because one "higher rated" recruiting class didn't live up to expectations doesn't mean that Al's teams with "lesser" recruits will always out-perform Al's teams with "greater" recruits.

As I mentioned before, your point is stupid and not worth discussing.

Of course you guys get caught up in simply pointing out the irony of the recruiting rankings and the success that has or hasn't been related to them. Bunch of fucking intellectuals, I tell ya.

[branchinator]

I haven't once mentioned recruiting rankings. Maybe that's a separate argument you need to have with OJ.