Anderson - is he really the guy ?
- Thread starter RedStormNC
- Start date
Paultzman post=452559 said:
Like pouring gas on an already big fire
Here's a question for anyone in the know: are there some major donors who perhaps weren't happy with Mullin's firing who are no longer donating? I know there was talk of this a few years ago (not sure how serious), but a couple reasons I ask:
1. Attendance has been absolutely pathetic (yes, I know things like COVID and ticket prices have played a factor, but still).
2. CMA's recruiting is far, far below what Lavin and Mullin achieved and also far below his level at Arkansas.
So again, is it possible that enough donors are boycotting CMA's tenure and that it's hurting recruiting? Not to make any excuses for CMA, but I do find it odd that Lavin and Mullin had top 10/25 classes but CMA has had zero top 60 classes in 4 cycles.
Also a second question... IF there are some major donors withholding support, could CMA's firing (whether in a year or four years) help bring everyone back together? I doubt too many people have much attachment to CMA as most did for Mullin.
What I'm getting at is maybe there is a way out of this awful contract if enough donors withholding support have a say in the next coach.
1. Attendance has been absolutely pathetic (yes, I know things like COVID and ticket prices have played a factor, but still).
2. CMA's recruiting is far, far below what Lavin and Mullin achieved and also far below his level at Arkansas.
So again, is it possible that enough donors are boycotting CMA's tenure and that it's hurting recruiting? Not to make any excuses for CMA, but I do find it odd that Lavin and Mullin had top 10/25 classes but CMA has had zero top 60 classes in 4 cycles.
Also a second question... IF there are some major donors withholding support, could CMA's firing (whether in a year or four years) help bring everyone back together? I doubt too many people have much attachment to CMA as most did for Mullin.
What I'm getting at is maybe there is a way out of this awful contract if enough donors withholding support have a say in the next coach.
SJU Double Alumn
Member
Where do you get that Mullin did better recruiting? Mullin brought in one top player. Ponds. That’s it. Mullin’s recruiting was terrible, mainly because he and Richmond did very little of it.Adam post=452562 said:
Mullins last 3 rosters. Yeah, CMA's brought in much better talent lol
[attachment=2417]7807F163-ADB5-4774-8102-F4C451137FFD.jpeg[/attachment][attachment=2418]5525A807-9B79-49B0-918D-0F3C229F9B38.jpeg[/attachment][attachment=2419]062A814A-40B3-4FD1-8B14-888AD8CBC2BD.jpeg[/attachment]
[attachment=2417]7807F163-ADB5-4774-8102-F4C451137FFD.jpeg[/attachment][attachment=2418]5525A807-9B79-49B0-918D-0F3C229F9B38.jpeg[/attachment][attachment=2419]062A814A-40B3-4FD1-8B14-888AD8CBC2BD.jpeg[/attachment]
Proud Alumn post=452564 said:
Every recruiting website agrees with me. Here are the 247 cumulative class rankings (cumulative of all major recruiting websites):
2015: #26 (Mullin year 1)
2016: #24 (Mullin year 2)
2017: #48 (Mullin year 3)
2018: #46 (Mullin year 4)
Mullin 4 year average: #36
2019: #159 (CMA year 1)
2020: #68 (CMA year 2)
2021: #63 (CMA year 3)
2022: #61 (CMA year 4)
CMA 4 year average: #88
If you disagree with the rankings, well I'll just say Mullin at least made the Tournament. I wasn't a fan of Mullin the coach, but his recruiting absolutely was better than CMA's. Also Mullin had some great transfers like Fig, Clark, Owens, Heron and Simon.
I don't want to get off-topic, though. My question was whether some Mullin fans have stopped donating and if that has impacted recruiting.
Last edited:
Adam after looking at the recruiting rankings, the discrepancy between Chris and CMA is even greater then I thought. Hard to believe that a guy who never coached before could recruit so much better than a long time coach. Granted, Matt did most of that recruiting. But at least Chris was smart enough to hire Matt. Amazing Chris could do that with all the same obstacles( aka lame excuses) that are being used as reasons for why CMA can't recruit better. Has to make one wonder. As for donations, I would think that Chris like all coaches, has wealthy friends and acquaintances who donate just because or their relationship. Once he left, I would assume that most or all of those donations dried up. I have no idea whether those were big donors or not. My guess: no donors big enough to move the needle very much.Adam post=452567 said:
Last edited:
SJU Double Alumn
Member
Do you guys even watch the games? Look at how the players performed. Other than Ponds, they weren’t as a whole any higher level of talent than Champ, Posh and Wheeler. Also, we don’t know yet how good Pinzon, Stanley, Storr etc will be. And Lavin did most of the recruiting of Lovett.Monte post=452568 said:
Mullin didn’t get us into the tournament. He got us into a game to play in to get into the tournament. A play in game is not in. You have to win that game to get in. And that on a season where we were 8-10 in conference and probably didn’t deserve the play in game.
beast of the east
Active member
Monte post=452563 said:
This article is an echo chamber of some opinions on here. Zach like other beat writers has few original thoughts, and troll message boards for ideas. He is even known to chat with one or more prominent users here to pick their brains. I'd discount this article although some here will think it reinforces their thoughts. In reality it is their thoughts.
Bottom line is dissecting in game decisions, who plays or not, or what is said in post game news conferences matters very very little. Getting better players is everything unless your coaching is inept, as say a NR.
Proud Alum wrote:
Do you guys even watch the games? Look at how the players performed. Other than Ponds, they weren’t as a whole any higher level of talent than Champ, Posh and Wheeler. Also, we don’t know yet how good Pinzon, Stanley, Storr etc will be. And Lavin did most of the recruiting of Lovett.
Mullin didn’t get us into the tournament. He got us into a game to play in to get into the tournament. A play in game is not in. You have to win that game to get in. And that on a season where we were 8-10 in conference and probably didn’t deserve the play in game.
A bit of revisionist history PA. That last Mullin team was so disappointing because they underperformed despite being very talented. That talent showed in at least four Quad 1 wins, twice against top 15 Marquette, on the road against Creighton and at home against #13 Nova (likely one or two others). Aside from the ultra talented Ponds, they had Figgy who had his best year for us and went on to have a good year with highly ranked Oregon and the BE defensive player of the year in Justin Simon who is having a pretty good career in Europe. That's not to even mention Mustapha Heron. The fact that Mullin couldn't win with the talent he had (although no depth) is what resulted in his not getting extended and leaving.
This team's results may yet wind up being as good as the last Mullin team, but the point of the other post was three of the four guys mentioned above were top 40 recruits out of high school.
Do you guys even watch the games? Look at how the players performed. Other than Ponds, they weren’t as a whole any higher level of talent than Champ, Posh and Wheeler. Also, we don’t know yet how good Pinzon, Stanley, Storr etc will be. And Lavin did most of the recruiting of Lovett.
Mullin didn’t get us into the tournament. He got us into a game to play in to get into the tournament. A play in game is not in. You have to win that game to get in. And that on a season where we were 8-10 in conference and probably didn’t deserve the play in game.
A bit of revisionist history PA. That last Mullin team was so disappointing because they underperformed despite being very talented. That talent showed in at least four Quad 1 wins, twice against top 15 Marquette, on the road against Creighton and at home against #13 Nova (likely one or two others). Aside from the ultra talented Ponds, they had Figgy who had his best year for us and went on to have a good year with highly ranked Oregon and the BE defensive player of the year in Justin Simon who is having a pretty good career in Europe. That's not to even mention Mustapha Heron. The fact that Mullin couldn't win with the talent he had (although no depth) is what resulted in his not getting extended and leaving.
This team's results may yet wind up being as good as the last Mullin team, but the point of the other post was three of the four guys mentioned above were top 40 recruits out of high school.
Last edited:
beast of the east
Active member
Monte post=452568 said:
It's my understanding that donations are up, though not nearly enough to fund facilities project. There was a $1 million donation last year by a donor who has been very generous to the university. As others have said, once a plan is approved, I believe generous donors large and small will step up. Whether that will be enough is anyone's guess.
beast of the east
Active member
NCJohnnie post=452577 said:
Good post even if you start uncharacteristically testy.
I don't care about the play in argument. On the week play began we were still one of 68 teams playing for a championship. It was a gift to be in after a disastrous skid at seasons end. Before that, we could have been as high as 6-7seed.
Point I agree with is this team is not bereft of talent. They've yet to find their footing, and there is a very good chance they will before long.
The criticism of success in recruiting is valid until proven wrong. As others have said the transfer portal will contain high grade talent, and I hope our staff is already getting prepared. It is reasonable though to say "show me" until we nail big time talent either way.
Stop changing the argument. No one said Mullin was a good coach, but his staff ran circles around CMA in the recruiting department. And so has every other coach, including Norm, who's ever been here. So please stop with the nonsense, saying the same thing over and over and over don't make it right. And what school exactly are you a "proud alum" of?Proud Alumn post=452574 said:
SJU Double Alumn
Member
Don't get testy because I'm showing how mistaken you are. Mullin's recruiting rankings are ridiculous. Freudenberg had a 4--star rating. So did Mussini (another one who was mostly a Lavin recruit but in your Mullin stats above). So did Yakwe. Mullin had one year where he brought in top talent (Ponds, and then Simon and Clark who were good but not great players) and after that had decent players no better than Anderson's recruits.Monte post=452587 said:
I had a conversation with Fr. Shanley over the summer at the golf outing. When he was running Providence, 11% of alumni were making contributions to the school. At SJU its 1%. How they don't have their most visible and perhaps wealthiest alumni in the fold is beyond me. I don't know what's happened behind the scenes, but with a new president I would hope someone has reached out to him to see what he wants for his money.
I honestly feel like we're more of a A10 mid major right now. It seems like every time something good is poised to happen, we lose or footing.
I honestly feel like we're more of a A10 mid major right now. It seems like every time something good is poised to happen, we lose or footing.
Proud Alumn- again, my intention was not to turn this into a Mullin vs CMA debate. I was just stating a fact that Mullin recruited much better than CMA, at least on paper (any recruiting website), and was wondering whether that had anything to do with Mullin supporters pulling donations. A few posters helped answer my question.
One final tidbit, in Quad 1 games:
Mullin Year 4: 5-7 (you conveniently left this out when discussing his record)
CMA Year 3: 0-6
So in other words CMA would need to go 5-1 in Quad 1 games just to match Mullin's team that "wasn't even in the real Tournament". If you think not making the "real" Tournament was bad, just wait until you see what it's like to not make the NIT.
Again, Mullin was a far better recruiter both on paper and in actual results, but my intention was to bring up the former rather than the latter.
One final tidbit, in Quad 1 games:
Mullin Year 4: 5-7 (you conveniently left this out when discussing his record)
CMA Year 3: 0-6
So in other words CMA would need to go 5-1 in Quad 1 games just to match Mullin's team that "wasn't even in the real Tournament". If you think not making the "real" Tournament was bad, just wait until you see what it's like to not make the NIT.
Again, Mullin was a far better recruiter both on paper and in actual results, but my intention was to bring up the former rather than the latter.
Last edited:
beast of the east
Active member
I don't know how much you were both drinking, or if you misheard, but our giving rating is about 4% to my knowledge. Still not good, but not 1%MSP710 post=452594 said: