I understand the frustration but Norm (and I was a Norm supporter for a llllooooonnnnnggggg time) did not leave the program in better shape because Lavin was starting over in year 2 with NO incoming recruits; well, one, Ron Roberts. So rather than SJU, with the history and fan expectations, imagine a new school joining the BE and recruiting a brand new team, difficult to say the least.Lavin has been a real enigma to me because I can see a strong case being made either way, he's been a bum (so to speak) for the product on the court or he has done an admirable job keeping the program above water while starting completely anew. I agree that next year is a do or die year in this sense, record aside, we need to see a team, an identity, a defined approach to the game, not glorified AAU nonsense.
Next year
- Thread starter SJUISBACK
- Start date
I understand the frustration but Norm (and I was a Norm supporter for a llllooooonnnnnggggg time) did not leave the program in better shape because Lavin was starting over in year 2 with NO incoming recruits; well, one, Ron Roberts. So rather than SJU, with the history and fan expectations, imagine a new school joining the BE and recruiting a brand new team, difficult to say the least.Lavin has been a real enigma to me because I can see a strong case being made either way, he's been a bum (so to speak) for the product on the court or he has done an admirable job keeping the program above water while starting completely anew. I agree that next year is a do or die year in this sense, record aside, we need to see a team, an identity, a defined approach to the game, not glorified AAU nonsense.
basketballjones
Well-known member
They're not at the same level. They're having a good run in this year's tournament. That's it. Over time they would lose to these teams. Georgetown would beat them 9 out 10 games if they played them multiple times.
"Hardy is as good a shooter as I've ever coached," Lavin said. "[Jason] Kapono [whom Lavin coached at UCLA] -- from long range, obviously [Kapono] had Reggie Miller range. But I'd say Hardy is right there with Kapono, if not better in certain ways, off the bounce and creating."
Was he wrong or lying?
post
Well, this post I have to take seriously because if there is one thing you seem to have a bead on it is insane. How crazy of me because of course, everyone knows one year worth of players with no recruits a program makes. Gotta go, Thursday is my day with the shrink you know.
jrhoops1949
Active member
Not for me to get in to another persons head, so lets call it a guess. Steve feels obligation to talk guys who play for him up.
The post you replied to had nothing to do with whether Norm 'made the program' and neither did you say anything about that. You said Norm "did not leave the program in better shape [than Jarvis] because Lavin ... was starting over in year two."
The facts are that Norm inherited a team of misfits that were leftover from a coaching staff that had presided over what Sports Illustrated rated as one of the top 25 most corrupt programs in the history of college basketball. The program was on NCAA probation, down a scholarship, coming off a 6 win season, and facing complete elimination:
"In an interview with the editorial board of the New York Daily News, Harrington said that he would recommend suspending the men's basketball program if it could not stay out of trouble. "I would go to the board [of trustees] and say, 'It's now my conviction we can't do it.' The university's values and mission are too important," Harrington said, according to the Feb. 12 edition of the Daily News.
Norm took a laughingstock and turned it into merely a doormat. He deserves credit for that. Lavin inherited a team of seniors that went on to the NCAA tournament. No probation, so sanctions, and possessing at least a shred of dignity. Yes, the scholarship balance was askew. That could fairly be termed somewhere between less than ideal and rotten.
You said something untrue. Stupid even. A good thing to do when you say something stupid is acknowledge it, maybe say something like "Yeah, that was stupid, what was I thinking." Or if you still think - despite all evidence to the contrary - that your original argument was sound, you could make a counter argument that posits facts and logic that support your position. Somewhat less compelling is bursting into tears and making mental health lames.
beast of the east
Active member
I believe it's all a subjective matter of perspective. Roberts inherited a program in shambles, but only 2 seasons removed from an NIT championship. There was every reason to believe that hiring that right coach could restore the program, since it was only in the dumper for one season. Roberts exited after 6 pitiful seasons, no NBA draft choices, and the worst Big East record of any coach. Many fans doubted that any coach could restore the program, except for the highest profil, most expensive guys like Donovan.
Remember, the Jarvis legacy was mostly created AFTER he was fired. Jarvis won an NIT and almost took a team to the Final Four. Roberts in 6 seasons took us to a first round exit in the NIT nd a dismal record. Jarvis coached again. Roberts will neverland a head coaching job again.
"Lavin inherited a team of seniors that went on to the NCAA tournament"
Fun. You make it seem that he had a full cupboard. Maybe he did, but but Lavin came in and took a DePaul-level team that was ranked somewhere near 14th in the league as juniors and finished tied for 3rd in the Big East. This year, Lavin with a team of youngsters had to suspend Harrison to keep us out of the tourney, and can't do the job? We were a bubble team this year which might not meet some expectations, but we really don't have any upperclassmen and are still missing a few pieces. I think next year with a bunch of juniors we probably will be in the tourney. I'd bet on it. Regardless on whether people are or aren't thrilled with a second round NIT exit, is our program really that far off from where we should be?? It's Lavin's second rebuilding year and we joined some pretty decent teams in the NIT that missed a tourney bid. We lost to one of them in UVA. There were plenty of others who have good coaches on board.
Lavin inherited a team that was full of pieces that Norm had no idea what to do with. They ended up being a bit better than we thought they were while being coached by Norm. I think Lavin's group will make progress next year when we get more help up front like Gift/Sanchez, and hopefully a guard like Jordan. Not holding breath on Jordan just yet, but would be a big, big addition.
Fun. You make it seem that he had a full cupboard. Maybe he did, but but Lavin came in and took a DePaul-level team that was ranked somewhere near 14th in the league as juniors and finished tied for 3rd in the Big East. This year, Lavin with a team of youngsters had to suspend Harrison to keep us out of the tourney, and can't do the job? We were a bubble team this year which might not meet some expectations, but we really don't have any upperclassmen and are still missing a few pieces. I think next year with a bunch of juniors we probably will be in the tourney. I'd bet on it. Regardless on whether people are or aren't thrilled with a second round NIT exit, is our program really that far off from where we should be?? It's Lavin's second rebuilding year and we joined some pretty decent teams in the NIT that missed a tourney bid. We lost to one of them in UVA. There were plenty of others who have good coaches on board.
Lavin inherited a team that was full of pieces that Norm had no idea what to do with. They ended up being a bit better than we thought they were while being coached by Norm. I think Lavin's group will make progress next year when we get more help up front like Gift/Sanchez, and hopefully a guard like Jordan. Not holding breath on Jordan just yet, but would be a big, big addition.
If you'd like to have a discussion of whether Norm was the right hire for SJ - and certainly that's a fresh and interesting topic that hasn't been beaten to death in the ten years since he was hired and I don't doubt you'll bring breathtaking insight into this breaking news story - my advice would be to (1) Start a thread about Norm not being the right hire (2) find someone who disagrees with you and (3) argue with them. That's not what is being discussed here.
No. Jarvis created the Jarvis legacy while he was coaching. He got caught after he was fired.
I have a proposition * for you. If you can explain how "Jarvis coached again" - that is, how Mike Jarvis getting another coaching job after leaving SJ - is even vaguely relevant to the question of whether Norm Roberts inherited a better situation at SJ from Jarvis than Steve Lavin inherited at SJ from Norm, I'll never post on this board again. You often invite me to stop posting here and to go away and never darken your doorway again. Now's your chance to get me to do it. All you have to do is explain how this statement - "Jarvis coached again" - has anything at all to do with the matter under discussion. You don't even have to show that its persuasive. All you need to explain is how rather than being completely irrelevant mindless non sequitur it has some minor tangential negligible bearing on what me and my boon companion Logen were discussing.
Feel free to give it a go. I'll go make popcorn.
* Offer void where prohibited. No warranties expressed, implied, or inferred if you’re illiterate. Do not attempt while operating a motor vehicle, watercraft, or aircraft. Do not attempt if you are currently taking a drug for depression. Do not continue if rash, redness, irritation or swelling develops. Proprositions have been found to cause cancer in laboratory rats. Employees must wash hands before returning to work. Results and mileage may vary.
I didn't say anything in this thread about Norm's coaching skill or lack thereof. I didn't say anything in this thread about Lavin's coaching skill or lack thereof. Perhaps you have this thread confused with another thread on a different board in which other thread on anothr board I said something completely different than what I said in this thread on this board in relation to completely different subjet matter. In this thread I was disagreeing with Logen, who said Lavin following Norm had an harder job than Norm following the Jarvae.Therefore I have your post and am replying merely in the interest of comity, lest you think I'm ignoring you and get your feeling hurt and start babbling about Kierkegaard.
Hey, you brought up the Kierkegaard... On to your point, Norm didn't have a hard job. He was handed a nothing, expected to do nothing and did nothing. Lavin took nothing and made them something. Interpret as you will, but Lavin took Norm's non-progression and progressed. I'll ask Sartre' what he thinks...