http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/colleges/post/_/id/3652/clearing-the-air-simeon-depaul-to-meet
Looks like Oliver Purnell is taking the time to try and win back Chicago. It'll be interesting to see if anything comes of this.
Why should a high school coach have a say in who a college hires as an assistant?
Meanwhile, Buzz continues to kick DePaul's ass in Chicago because he pays attention to the AAU coaches that matter and not the small-minded high school coaches.
Quote from: bilsu on September 09, 2011, 08:34:30 PM
Why should a high school coach have a say in who a college hires as an assistant?
This is exactly why I found the article interesting. It's one of those unspoken and not explicitly shady things that goes on in college basketball that, for some reason, is getting some very candid coverage.
Is it against any rules if DePaul completely locks down Chicago Simeon recruits for the next 10 years by buying their loyalty through hiring connected assistant coaches? It happens at other schools, but with this particular situation being so transparent I find it hard to believe that the NCAA wouldn't try to get involved.
When DePaul is a joke it makes it easier to recruit players like Taylor and Tate. Those wishing for a stronger DePaul are wishing for a weaker MU. Here's to several more years of low single digits conference wins!
I thought it was interesting that the Simeon coach openly says he had absolutely no influence on Taylor - the best recruit in the state - going to Marquette. If he's not chipping in on Taylor, why should anyone, particularly Purnell, expect that he'll have influence over any recruit?
Quote from: Jamailman on September 10, 2011, 07:23:08 AM
When DePaul is a joke it makes it easier to recruit players like Taylor and Tate. Those wishing for a stronger DePaul are wishing for a weaker MU. Here's to several more years of low single digits conference wins!
Baloney. We recruit nationally. Chicago is but one locale where we recruit. There is enough talent there for us, DePaul, Illinois and a host of other schools who recruit there.
I want DePaul to be the best they can be. The old Al/Ray match-ups were exciting as was the old DePaul-Marquette games of the early 1980s. This is a storied rivalry and to suggest a strong DePaul weakens us is ignorant. Sorry, but that's true. Heck that logic implies that a strong Notre Dame, kansas or North Carolina hurts us too, because they recruit for the same people we do. I hope we win a few there, but I want good competitors and strong storied rivalries.
Here's hoping Coach Purnell restores the fire in the Demon. But we still beat 'em consistently.
If DePaul continues to suffer, it's a good thing. Hopefully, if the BE contracts, they'll cut them loose than us. The Chicago market belongs to ND anyways. ;)
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on September 12, 2011, 09:17:04 PM
If DePaul continues to suffer, it's a good thing. Hopefully, if the BE contracts, they'll cut them loose than us. The Chicago market belongs to ND anyways. ;)
Huh?
The beauty of the Chicago market today is that it does not "belong" to anyone. Umm, North Carolina, Duke, the Big 10, us, DePaul and ND all can recruit here, along with Kansas Texas and anyone who comes here.
I don't wish failure on anyone -- except perhaps the Rodent in Red -- but rather I seek Warrior success. If a few Demons, Irishmen, Hoyas, Orange, dogs and Panthers occasionally lose in the process, OK. But I don't wish them ill.
And in the MU v DePaul argument as it relates to conferences, I still think people tend to overvalue our recent success vs DePaul's potential tie to the Chicago TV market. I think in 99.99999% of scenarios we are a package deal, but should that not prove the case, I think the BEast would sooner take Loyola and kick us out than lose the Chicago market for a potential BEast network/when selling TV rights.
Quote from: Brewtown Andy on September 10, 2011, 10:42:59 AM
I thought it was interesting that the Simeon coach openly says he had absolutely no influence on Taylor - the best recruit in the state - going to Marquette. If he's not chipping in on Taylor, why should anyone, particularly Purnell, expect that he'll have influence over any recruit?
Exactly. The role of the HS coach these days in Chicago is completely overrated.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 09, 2011, 08:46:49 PM
Meanwhile, Buzz continues to kick DePaul's ass in Chicago because he pays attention to the AAU coaches that matter and not the small-minded high school coaches.
Just my opinion, but writing Buzz is kicking ass over DePaul in Chicago seems a little overblown. It wasn't too long ago there were people on here mumbling about whether or not our presence still mattered in that hotbed.
Taylor was a huge get to re-establish a pipeline but until he committed our only impact was a eight game player who was asked out the back door well before any girl could put on her Freshman 15.
Quote from: dgies9156 on September 12, 2011, 08:54:31 PM
Baloney. We recruit nationally. Chicago is but one locale where we recruit. There is enough talent there for us, DePaul, Illinois and a host of other schools who recruit there.
I want DePaul to be the best they can be. The old Al/Ray match-ups were exciting as was the old DePaul-Marquette games of the early 1980s. This is a storied rivalry and to suggest a strong DePaul weakens us is ignorant. Sorry, but that's true. Heck that logic implies that a strong Notre Dame, kansas or North Carolina hurts us too, because they recruit for the same people we do. I hope we win a few there, but I want good competitors and strong storied rivalries.
Here's hoping Coach Purnell restores the fire in the Demon. But we still beat 'em consistently.
Al owned Ray on the court and in recruiting. After Al retired, DePaul kicked our asses regularly, and owned Chicago recruiting (Mark Aguirre, Terry Cummings).
Quote from: MUBurrow on September 13, 2011, 08:09:07 AM
And in the MU v DePaul argument as it relates to conferences, I still think people tend to overvalue our recent success vs DePaul's potential tie to the Chicago TV market. I think in 99.99999% of scenarios we are a package deal, but should that not prove the case, I think the BEast would sooner take Loyola and kick us out than lose the Chicago market for a potential BEast network/when selling TV rights.
Say What?
I agree with the need for a presence in Chicago. But Loyola?
That's like saying Illinois-Chicago will join for access to the Chicago market.
Loyola hasn't been good since Alfredrick Hughes was there in the 1980s and thought he was Pistol Pete Maravich. That Rambler has been dead and so far buried that it has turned to a fossil. Not even God could resurrect that dead body.
DePaul may be on life support, but there is still a discernable dribble in its presence here in Chicago. I would suspect they are at a crossroads in that their program is facing rigamortis and possible fossilization unless Purnell does something soon. But there's still something to be had there.
I agree Al owned Chicago, but the DePaul were usually competitive and when Al retired, we were usually competitive with them. Who can forget Joe Ponsetto and that 'fro that scraped the scoreboard.
I repeat, we need to win but it is in our best interests to have winning programs around us as well. That's the whole point of the BigEast!
People that say HS coaches have nothing to do with recruiting are clueless.
Anyone remeber Tyshawn Taylor?
Bottom line....not all recruitments are handled the same. Sometimes a player is very close with his HS coach or a collge coach knows the HS coach real well. Other times it is the AAu coach or aplayer is very close with his AAU coach. Sometimes both.
Bottom line is the Simeon coach not being heavily involved with Taylor's recruitment does not mean Buzz is blowing him off or that the coach does or does not like Buzz. People are reading to much into it. It simply means that in Steve Taylors particular recruitment it sounds like the communication went thru the AAu coach or the parents, prolly both.
Purnell making inroads with the Simeon coach in no way shape or form is good for Depaul's competition.
Quote from: dgies9156 on September 13, 2011, 02:07:05 PM
Say What?
I agree with the need for a presence in Chicago. But Loyola?
Haha, hyperbole. Forgive the lack of teal. I definitely agree with you that a stronger DePaul would serve us well, not hurt us. I definitely think we and DePaul are a package deal in the BEast for better or worse, so seeing them win a couple games would be good for us in terms of conference stability, even if it makes recruiting a touch tougher
Quote from: MUBurrow on September 13, 2011, 07:22:04 PM
Haha, hyperbole. Forgive the lack of teal. I definitely agree with you that a stronger DePaul would serve us well, not hurt us. I definitely think we and DePaul are a package deal in the BEast for better or worse, so seeing them win a couple games would be good for us in terms of conference stability, even if it makes recruiting a touch tougher
As long as the wins are not against us.
Quote from: dgies9156 on September 13, 2011, 02:07:05 PM
Say What?
I agree with the need for a presence in Chicago. But Loyola?
That's like saying Illinois-Chicago will join for access to the Chicago market.
Loyola hasn't been good since Alfredrick Hughes was there in the 1980s and thought he was Pistol Pete Maravich. That Rambler has been dead and so far buried that it has turned to a fossil. Not even God could resurrect that dead body.
DePaul may be on life support, but there is still a discernable dribble in its presence here in Chicago. I would suspect they are at a crossroads in that their program is facing rigamortis and possible fossilization unless Purnell does something soon. But there's still something to be had there.
I agree Al owned Chicago, but the DePaul were usually competitive and when Al retired, we were usually competitive with them. Who can forget Joe Ponsetto and that 'fro that scraped the scoreboard.
I repeat, we need to win but it is in our best interests to have winning programs around us as well. That's the whole point of the BigEast!
Yea, I mean whats next - we accept Texas Christian for the Texas marketttt.... ohhhh wait.
I think adding "markets" for the sake of markets is overrated. Compare and contrast two recent expansions - the ACC and the Big Ten. The ACC was so concerned about markets, that it added Boston College for the Boston television market. However, in doing so, they added a school that didn't have anything to do with the ACC. I think everyone would agree now that West Virginia would have been the much better choice. It fits the ACC profile so much better, and is a much better overall sports program than BC.
The Big Ten adds Nebraska, which everyone agrees was a very good idea, despite the fact that it really brings in no huge markets. But it is the overall program that matters and is a good fit.
The problem that the BE is facing is that it doesn't know what it wants to be. Is it going to be a football conference that tries to be a bigger player in the BCS? Or is it going to be a basketball conference like it was in the 80s? If it is going to be the former, expanding to Texas, Kansas, etc. makes sense. If it is going to be the latter, MU fits that profile very well, but expansion is a bad idea.
The BE is heading down the same bad road that the ACC went down...but it is going down it much faster in a car that has worse brakes. The conference has to figure out what it wants to be and not just running around chasing markets for the sake of markets.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 14, 2011, 08:44:00 AM
The ACC was so concerned about markets, that it added Boston College for the Boston television market. However, in doing so, they added a school that didn't have anything to do with the ACC. I think everyone would agree now that West Virginia would have been the much better choice. It fits the ACC profile so much better, and is a much better overall sports program than BC.
The Big Ten adds Nebraska, which everyone agrees was a very good idea, despite the fact that it really brings in no huge markets. But it is the overall program that matters and is a good fit.
The problem that the BE is facing is that it doesn't know what it wants to be. Is it going to be a football conference that tries to be a bigger player in the BCS? Or is it going to be a basketball conference like it was in the 80s? If it is going to be the former, expanding to Texas, Kansas, etc. makes sense. If it is going to be the latter, MU fits that profile very well, but expansion is a bad idea.
The conference has to figure out what it wants to be and not just running around chasing markets for the sake of markets.
Your brilliance is being wasted in academia. You should be running a Fortune 500 Company.
All kidding aside, this is the first thing the BE should do. Great point Sultan.
Thanks. Part of it is I'm not entirely convinced why expanding is a good idea. Unless you are really going to add more to your "brand," and your per school revenue, what is the point? Adding Kansas and Missouri is not going to do that. Frankly it muddies it even more.
When Conference USA was put together, it went through some of that. It was a strange mish-mash of schools that didn't have much in common with one another outside of the fact that they were looking for something better. You had these basketball schools mixed in with football schools...northern and southern...urban and rural...
After things settled down, Conference USA has turned into a nice thing. A southern football conference made up of schools on the "next tier" down from the BCS. It has an identity.
I think what you really want is to increase the overall value of the conference. There are really two things to consider and I will pick on DePaul for this. Adding DePaul in theory added the Chicago market to the Big East. However, does this (given DePaul's current lack of success) bring in any audience and thus add value to the conference. The Big 10 adding Nebraska did not bring in a big TV market area, but I suspect there are a lot of football fans accross the country that would be interested in watching Nebraska play UW, Ohio St, Michigan, Penn St, etc. I am not sure how many people accross the country would get excited about a Uconn/DePaul basketball game on TV. I am not sure anybody in Chicago that is not a hard core DePaul fan would even watch the game, so did the big East really add a hugh market area when DePaul joined the conference? Now take a look at adding Kansas to the Big East. Would anybody want to watch a Kansas/Syrcacuse football game outside of the competing schools' fanbases? However, on the basketball side the game would probalby interest a lot of people. The Big East needs to remember that basketball is their bread and butter when they add/delete programs.
bilsu, I completely agree with you with exception of the adding of Kansas. I would love to see a Kansas / Syracuse basketball game. But that doesn't mean that they should be in the same conference as one another. (I'm not convinced that they shouldn't be though.)
Of course, that begs the question of why the BE added TCU...