from a chat with John Carroll, from Scouts Inc., on espn.com:
Bob - NYC: Top 3 - 5 recruiters in your eyes?
John Carroll: In no special order, I'd say Tom Crean from Marquette, Rick Pitino and John Calipari because of their NBA pedigree, attract kids who want to get to the NBA. Ben Howland from UCLA is a guy who works hard at recruiting and has been able to, in his short time there, take his team to the Final Four. Billy Donovan might be the best recruiter in the country. He's young, won two Final Fours, has a lot of energy, and understands how to make players better. Another guy who does a great job is Tom Izzo at MSU. He gets the best players in-state to stay home and occasionally lands very good players out of state. Bruce Weber has done a great job at Illinois, getting four high-level underclassmen. Another guy to mention here is Thad Matta at OSU, who has done a great job locking up four of the best players in the country here for '08, and already has three commitments for the class of 2010. Two of the kids are in the top 10-15 players in the country.
TC has lived off his recruiter tag for years but in reality the majority of his classes haven't been that special (what has been special is his prep work that puts kids in a position to succeed). You want to know who is a good recruiter? Quinn Snyder...that guy always has stacked teams of high profile kids. Now he couldn't coach his way out of a paper bag but he got players.
To me a great recruiter is someone who brings in kids better than their school. We really haven't had any player outside of maybe DJ where people say...wow how did he end up at MU (yes b/c of Wade's proximity and grades I'm not calling him a blow me away recruit).
How can you take his word for it when he rates Coach Crean ahead of Thad Matta?? Or Ben Howland? Or Donovan?!?! Wow!
If I were a team subscribing to the Scouts service for recruiting tips, I'd cancel my subscription!
Quote from: HarveysWallbangers on October 24, 2007, 08:55:32 AM
How can you take his word for it when he rates Coach Crean ahead of Thad Matta?? Or Ben Howland? Or Donovan?!?! Wow!
If I were a team subscribing to the Scouts service for recruiting tips, I'd cancel my subscription!
Perspective. Is it easier to recruit to OSU or MU? When Thad Matta was at a school the same size of MU was he recruiting as well as Crean? Let's compare apples to apples here.
Was Jim Tressel recruiting the same type of kids at Youngstown State as he is at OSU? Same guy....different school....different access to athletes.
I believe that's what the author was saying.
And frankly, how easy is it to recruit players to go to school in Champaign? Weber's had some pretty high profile misses, but we'd kill to have his backup signees. Calipari is stuck in CUSA and he's getting much better recruits than Marquette.
Sure, Donovan and Howland are coaching in virtual paradise, but come on.
You can't honestly think Crean should be mentioned in the piece.
whether or not you think he belongs, and you are cetainly entitled to your opinion, the point is that this guy WHO GETS PAID TO FOLLOW RECRUITING FOR A LIVING, thinks crean is a pretty good recruiter. he has slightly more credibility than you.
As far as Illinois is concerned, they are a public school with huge resources and benefits. furthermore, weber has only one good recruiting class in his time there, and that class is in 2009! crean has had at least 2 monster classes, so if you're giving props to weber, you better throw them crean's way as well.
Calipari is probably the best recruiter in the country, no argument there...
Sorry, but if he thinks Crean is one of the three best recruiters in the country, he shouldn't be paid to offer his opinions on the subject. He's not even in the top 3 in the Big East. In fact, he's only the second best recruiter in Wisconsin.
"Billy Donovan might be the best recruiter in the country"
- you guys need to reread the quote. He is not saying Crean is top 3. In actuality he is saying Crean is top 8. The first 3 guys do to their guys in the nba or nba pedigree, and then he rattles off different reasons why the 5 others are good recruiters... c'mon guys :-\ read
What part of "In no special order" do some of you guys not understand?
He was asked a question and responded with a the first guys who came to mind.
All you can take from this is that he thinks Crean does a good job on the recruiting trail.
Quote from: HarveysWallbangers on October 24, 2007, 10:09:42 AM
Sorry, but if he thinks Crean is one of the three best recruiters in the country, he shouldn't be paid to offer his opinions on the subject. He's not even in the top 3 in the Big East. In fact, he's only the second best recruiter in Wisconsin.
Lets go back to comparing apples to apples... it is much easier to recruit to Wisconsin as it is to recruit to Marquette. There are more sports, more notariety and just more money in the program. Thad Motta at OSU is working with the highest bankroll in college sports. Is it a mystery why schools like OSU and Florida are becoming power houses in both football and basketball? No, its all about the $$$ if you have the money you can have more options to recruit kids. Someone brought up the was Thad Motta recruiting the same kids at smaller schools where he was at, that is a perfect example. Look at Bruce Pearl, at UWM was getting decent players, goes to Tennessee, boom outstanding players. Is that recruiting skills? No, thats the school. John Calipari is amazing in my eyes, but then again, Memphis hasn't graduated a player in how many years?
That has to count for something
Everybody puts too much stock into those recruiting rating services. It's easy to put Lebron James or Dwight Hopward at the top of your list, but after about the first ten there are a lot of misses on those Top 150 lists (some even in the top ten). All they rate them on is their offensive skills and their size. They don't take into account defense, the kid's attitude or work habits.
You can't truly rate a recruiting class until a few years down the road.
A few examples, in 2003, was Brian Butch (consensus top ten) a better recruit than Josh Boone (about #75)?
Dameon Mason was a much higher rated player (#50) than Jerel McNeal was (#100). Who turned out to be a better player?
I agree that Crean hasn't had the greatest track record on some of his recruits, but let's not knee jerk reaction to losing some of these prospects. What I'm getting at is, Shumpert could end up being a superstar or a bust, but don't put that much stock into his Top 25 rating.
Some coaches get labeled as a great recruiter (Crean), and that label just sticks to them, whether it's true or not (right Kevin O'Neill).
Just because you always get a lot of high rated kids, doesn't mean you are a great recruiter. Some of those schools sell themselves. Does anybody know what other "perks" these kids get offered?
Marquette is at least on the national recruiting stage now, and that's because of Crean.
" Look at Bruce Pearl, at UWM was getting decent players, goes to Tennessee, boom outstanding players. Is that recruiting skills? No, thats the school."
Of course Tenn. didn't get those players before Pearl got there so it must not be the school right?
It all depends on your point of view.
Bruce Pearl is a good recruiter who is now at a school (and in a conference) that allows him access to players he had no chance with at UWM.
I won't insult anyone by listing which colleges the other coaches mentioned coach at, but take a good look at that list. All of the other coaches are at huge state schools, nearly all have football teams that are ranked from time to time, all are in states that are basketball/sports hotbeds. None of these apply to our beloved MU. Perhaps the source of the quote is referring to how hard and well he works to even get to the finals with some of these kids. Maybe he is referencing TC's ability to find diamonds in the rough. Once again, somebody on the outside looking in says something nice about our program and our fans rush to say how wrong they are.
"Once again, somebody on the outside looking in says something nice about our program and our fans rush to say how wrong they are."
This does seem to happen a lot and it could be a case of Marquette fans being a lot more familiar with the situation than people who are covering more than 300 programs.
'This does seem to happen a lot and it could be a case of Marquette fans being a lot more familiar with the situation than people who are covering more than 300 programs."
Or could it be a case that the national guy is unbiased and you are not?
All this guy said was that he thinks Tom Crean is one of the best recruiters in the nation.
He didn't say he was the best.
A fan of Marquette just might consider this to be good publicity for the program.
For whatever reason you seem to be offended by it.
I'd just like to get a reporter capable of that kind of hyperbole to write about my love-making ability.
Actually, Kevin O'Neil was the one who put Tenn bball on the map..., prior to him coaching (and recruiting) there, the women's team and the football team were the draws, mens bball couldn't draw flys. When he left, his recruits were just maturing and they had tremendous sucess. He (O'Neil) was a great college recruiter; he took recruits from UCLA, and AZ while at MU. I'd like to see similar performance today in the recruiting arena, however, I don't have a prob w/ TC being mentioned along w/ a dozen or so other guys as a good recruiter.
HarveysWallbangers-
You obviously differ from the author in your opinion of Tom Crean, at least as far as recruiting goes.
Could you kindly post the credentials that lead you to believe that your opinion is worth more than the opinion of this author. For what its worth, I am not asking for points that support your opinion. Rather, I am asking for your personal credentials, so that I can decide whether or not to take your word as the final say.
Thanks in advance.
he also said that Crean was a good recruiter for guys looking to make the jump to the next level. Wade is a star, Diener seems to be loved in Indiana, albeit he's only been there a few months, and Novak is said to be one of the favorite outlet men for T-Mac. There are three guys from MU in the NBA under Crean's time as our head coach and a number of others playing around the world or in the NBDL. He said Crean could get guys to the NBA and he has been able to do that. Plus, being a relatively small private college, I'm proud to see our coach being mentioned in the same sentence as big name coaches at bigger name schools. For gosh sakes, most of the UW schools have larger student bodies than MU. We aren't a big school and don't have a laundry list of success like Duke so I can see why he would lump Crean in with the rest of these coaches.
Perhaps somebody can print some evidence of Crean being a top notch recruiter using next year's incoming freshmen and our current freshman and sophomore classes.
Perhaps MUCam -- instead of picking on Wallbanger -- can start.
Thanks.
PRN -
I'd love to start, but...
(1) Next year's class is not finalized, so it certainly wouldn't be a fair evaluation.
(2) At this point, I'll admit that Crean's recruiting results will likely end up being disappointing. You cannot miss out on (arguably) your two top targets and not be disappointed.
However, perhaps that should wait for another thread. This thread, if I read it correctly, was about one expert's opinion regarding Crean as a recruiter. However, when HarveyWallBanger decided to throw out his "expert" opinion to bash the author of the article, I thought to myself, "What are Harvey's credentials? What gives him the confidence to be so affirmative in his position?"
Problem is, people are so tied up in their own personal feelings that they can't be fair and objective. That, more than anything else, drives me nuts. It is fair to think Crean is not the end all be all. It is fair to criticize Crean. But, when one's criticisms are constant and without any sign of objectivity, then they lose any and all worth.
For what its worth, I think Crean is overrated as a recruiter. That said, I think he is much better, recruiting wise, than we have been in a long, long, long time. When was the last time we truly had a chance of landing a Top 25 player? Did we miss out? Yes and I acknowledge that second (or third) in recruiting is as good as last. It might even be worse. But, at least we had the chance. That, I can accept objectively, is an improvement from what we had seen for so long.
how can you give Calipari credit when he has to walk about 5 steps outside of his office to get the best of the best in the country?
I just realized, if Harveyswallbangers is the same guy who hangs out on jsonline with that name, then we have a troll.
What are you guys talking about? All I've said is that mentioning Crean with those other recruiters seems over the top (WAAAAY over the top).
For the guy who asked about my credentials, I can only cite 30 years as a Marquette fan. It seems to me that O'Neill was actually a better recruiter than Crean. Not a better coach -- a better recruiter. In fact, I don't even know where Crean got this reputation as a good recruiter. After all, isn't Harvard outrecruiting us at the moment? I seem to recall that even Bob Dukiet had some decent recruits -- until MU rejected them for various reasons -- a problem our current coach doesn't seem to have.
As for this guy who asked about "hanging out" at jsonline, I literally have zero idea what you're talking about. Where would I "hang out" on a website?
And frankly, I think the knee jerk reaction to my opinion on our recruiting -- and I don't post here very often -- is very strange.
Frankly, the knee jerk reaction is to your knee jerk reaction. Here are your quotes:
"If I were a team subscribing to the Scouts service for recruiting tips, I'd cancel my subscription!"
"You can't honestly think Crean should be mentioned in the piece."
"Sorry, but if he thinks Crean is one of the three best recruiters in the country, he shouldn't be paid to offer his opinions on the subject. He's not even in the top 3 in the Big East. In fact, he's only the second best recruiter in Wisconsin."
"This does seem to happen a lot and it could be a case of Marquette fans being a lot more familiar with the situation than people who are covering more than 300 programs."
You want to have a fair and intelligent conversation, then have one. Spewing forth quips like the ones above, does absolutely nothing. I don't even know that the original poster agrees with the author of the article. The point of the original post is to show that at least some people out there think Crean is a competent recruiter. Blasting the Scout author for his opinion, and essentially putting yours on a pedestal does nothing for the sake of discussion.
Maybe you could try saying, "I have to disagree with the author for these reasons," rather than "if he thinks Crean is one of the three best recruiters in the country, he shouldn't be paid to offer his opinions on the subject." Maybe then, sounding somewhat reasonable, you would elicit something other than a "knee jerk reaction."
Quote from: MUCam on October 24, 2007, 04:28:52 PM
Maybe you could try saying, "I have to disagree with the author for these reasons,"
Get over yourself, professor. When did this place turn into English class? Maybe you can help Harvey out by creating a "Proper Posting Procedures" page on the Wiki.
It appears to me that the sensitivity factor is on the rise on this board!!
Funny you should mention it...perhaps a proper posting procedures wouldn't be all that bad.
Since when does the internet allow us the right to be confrontational, stubborn and opinionated? Since when did being reasonable and understanding become a negative? Has it become taboo to have an intelligent conversation without resorting to subtle insults and irrational tirades? When did class get subtracted from the equation?
You don't think Crean is a good recruiter? You disagree with the author's opinion? Fine. Say it, state your reasons for your opinion, and move along. But this narrow-minded, melodramatic barrage of one-liners has become a tired old mantra.
I love the fact that HarveyWallBangers questions Crean, someone questions Harvey, and so in comes PRN to defend the poor and the helpless.
The real funny thing is, PRN, that whenever you have been pushed on your opinions of Crean, it has always come back to the same - I don't like the guy. Now that is objectivity (sarcastic and hypocritical insult intended).
By the way, I'll come off the high horse now, if you'll lend me a hand...
TC has had two very good classes and the both coincided with a special timing event---the first was his arrival as the new coach back in 1999----and the second event was the opening of the Al McGuire Center and becoming a member of the BE. His other classes have been mediocure!
Quote from: MUCam on October 24, 2007, 04:28:52 PM
Maybe you could try saying, "I have to disagree with the author for these reasons," rather than "if he thinks Crean is one of the three best recruiters in the country, he shouldn't be paid to offer his opinions on the subject." Maybe then, sounding somewhat reasonable, you would elicit something other than a "knee jerk reaction."
This coming from the guy who said this:
QuoteHarveysWallbangers-
You obviously differ from the author in your opinion of Tom Crean, at least as far as recruiting goes.
Could you kindly post the credentials that lead you to believe that your opinion is worth more than the opinion of this author. For what its worth, I am not asking for points that support your opinion. Rather, I am asking for your personal credentials, so that I can decide whether or not to take your word as the final say.
Thanks in advance.
Which has really provides nothing -- not a damn thing -- to the thread.
Also, to the person who said Harvey's is a troll... if it's the same HW who posts over at BTF, he most certainly is
not a troll, but I guess it's easier to just say he might be a troll than to argue his points.
As far as what John Carroll said -- I find it histerical that he mentions Crean as one of the top recruiters. I'm sorry, but he hasn't even pulled in ONE five-star recruit, yet he's a top recruiter? And I don't want to make it seem like I'm slamming Crean -- I'm really not, I think the total package that he brings as a coach is above average -- but there's not a chance in hell I'd have him anywhere near my top ten college basketball recruiters.
You guys continue to not read what the author said...strange.
I have been very disappointed with our recruiting misses, especially this year but frankly, I don't remember a time when we have been in on so many top 100 players and going up against the big boys when we are not there yet. Players wouldnt even sniff MU in the past actually mention us and are interested in MU. Wade, Diener, Novak, Merritt, James, McNeal, Matthews, Williams and Williams. All top 100 players when the only top 100 players I can remember after O'Neill is Cordell.
Also while we did lose out on Shumpert we were in on him till the end. When was the last time we almost ended up getting a top 20 recruit let alone just missing out. Rivers? Personally it sounds like a lot of old timers around here are living in the past and don't want to give TC his dues.
I don't know if TC is a top 10 recruiter but he is closer to top 10 than the middle of the pack which some of you seem to be hinting at. A good comparison would be TC against all the other private universities. Few and John Thompson III might be the only coaches out there who have similar situations and might be better recruiters. Thompson for sure considering what he is pulling in right now.
What Crean is good at is identifying players that are not on the radar. The problem here is if the player all of a sudden improves like Shuppert, then the big name schools show up. The key here is to get the early commitment.
CW...who was the last Marquette head coach to pull in a 5 star recruit and which decade was that?
Crean has pulled in 4 star recruits, something that hasn't been seen around those parts also in many a moon.
Quote from: mufanatic on October 24, 2007, 08:27:57 PM
but frankly, I don't remember a time when we have been in on so many top 100 players and going up against the big boys when we are not there yet. Players wouldnt even sniff MU in the past actually mention us and are interested in MU. All top 100 players when the only top 100 players I can remember after O'Neill is Cordell.
Also while we did lose out on Shumpert we were in on him till the end. When was the last time we almost ended up getting a top 20 recruit let alone just missing out. Rivers? Personally it sounds like a lot of old timers around here are living in the past and don't want to give TC his dues.
I don't know if TC is a top 10 recruiter but he is closer to top 10 than the middle of the pack which some of you seem to be hinting at. A good comparison would be TC against all the other private universities. Few and John Thompson III might be the only coaches out there who have similar situations and might be better recruiters. Thompson for sure considering what he is pulling in right now.
Excellent post.
Again, we aren't Duke, UNC, or UCLA and just 5-8 years ago we would never even have fathomed being in contention for top 100 recruits. This is a learning process and as the program gets better (Under Crean) the better the chances we have at landing these recruits not just being in the mix. Just because we didn't land Shumpert or Swopshire doesn't mean Crean is a terrible recruiter. How close would we have been with Deane? (I'll give you 2 guesses but you'll probably only need 1)
I'll say this----TC gets my vote for hadrdest working recruiter in the nation. However, the bottomline hasn't been commensurate with that amount of effort.
I think he needs to reevaluate his approach to recruiting like any CEO would, when profit margins are shrinking!
Quote from: muarmy81 on October 25, 2007, 06:08:29 AM
Quote from: mufanatic on October 24, 2007, 08:27:57 PM
but frankly, I don't remember a time when we have been in on so many top 100 players and going up against the big boys when we are not there yet. Players wouldnt even sniff MU in the past actually mention us and are interested in MU. All top 100 players when the only top 100 players I can remember after O'Neill is Cordell.
Also while we did lose out on Shumpert we were in on him till the end. When was the last time we almost ended up getting a top 20 recruit let alone just missing out. Rivers? Personally it sounds like a lot of old timers around here are living in the past and don't want to give TC his dues.
I don't know if TC is a top 10 recruiter but he is closer to top 10 than the middle of the pack which some of you seem to be hinting at. A good comparison would be TC against all the other private universities. Few and John Thompson III might be the only coaches out there who have similar situations and might be better recruiters. Thompson for sure considering what he is pulling in right now.
Excellent post.
Again, we aren't Duke, UNC, or UCLA and just 5-8 years ago we would never even have fathomed being in contention for top 100 recruits. This is a learning process and as the program gets better (Under Crean) the better the chances we have at landing these recruits not just being in the mix. Just because we didn't land Shumpert or Swopshire doesn't mean Crean is a terrible recruiter. How close would we have been with Deane? (I'll give you 2 guesses but you'll probably only need 1)
Bingo!
I can't believe how short some people's memories are around here.
As somebody who isn't from WI, I can tell you that MU was NOWHERE on the national scene until Crean revived it. I was a big college hoops fan growing up (80's and 90's), and MU was never talked about amongst my group of friends. It just wasn't. Sorry. It also was never talked about on ESPN, or ABC, or CBS. They just weren't good enough. Sorry again.
I know people are going to pound the Kevin O'Neil drum, and I do think he was an excellent coach, he didn't stay long enough to have an impact on the national scene.
Crean may not be the best recruiter in the nation (how the hell do you determine that anyways?), but from where MU started, to where he has it now is impressive. Why can't people admit that?
We used to battle dayton for recruits... now we are battling UNC. There are no moral victories, but please recognize that the state of the program is much better now... and a large part of that is his ability to recruit.
I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that TC is the best recruiter here since Al----but the issue is----is he a top 10 recruiter nationally?
Quote from: Murffieus on October 25, 2007, 08:47:36 AM
I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that TC is the best recruiter here since Al----but the issue is----is he a top 10 recruiter nationally?
I dispute that.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on October 25, 2007, 08:58:44 AM
Quote from: Murffieus on October 25, 2007, 08:47:36 AM
I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that TC is the best recruiter here since Al----but the issue is----is he a top 10 recruiter nationally?
I dispute that.
you dispute everything said abt crean that is positive. I dispute your head being screwed on straight
Quote from: muwarrior87 on October 25, 2007, 09:02:15 AM
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on October 25, 2007, 08:58:44 AM
Quote from: Murffieus on October 25, 2007, 08:47:36 AM
I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that TC is the best recruiter here since Al----but the issue is----is he a top 10 recruiter nationally?
I dispute that.
you dispute everything said abt crean that is positive. I dispute your head being screwed on straight
Not true. I think he's a tireless worker and somebody who draws up some great game plans in the off season...serving us extremely well in the conference.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on October 25, 2007, 08:58:44 AM
Quote from: Murffieus on October 25, 2007, 08:47:36 AM
I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that TC is the best recruiter here since Al----but the issue is----is he a top 10 recruiter nationally?
I dispute that.
Really?
Who was better?
Hank?
Rick?
Kevin?
Look at the condition of the program when Crean started recruiting, and look at the level now. A lot of that has to do with his ability to bring in talent.
Oneil appeared be a a good recruiter, but it's hard to say what his long term impact was because his tenure was so short.
Quote from: Murffieus on October 25, 2007, 08:47:36 AM
I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that TC is the best recruiter here since Al----but the issue is----is he a top 10 recruiter nationally?
well, I think that is all a matter of opinion, and that's where the problem lies.
Somebody asked John Carroll, from Scouts Inc (a guy who follows recruiting closely) who he thought were the top recruiters were. He cited that he thought Crean was near the top of the list.
Then people come on here blasting abut how Crean isn't a good recruiter... blah blah blah.
At the end of the day, Carroll provided his professional opinion. Now, everybody is entitled to their own opinion, but everybody needs to realize that a guy that does this for a living has a better perspective on recruiting then most/all of us on this board.
Take his opinion for what it's worth... but realistically (given his knowledge) its worth much more then the majority of posters here.
Quote from: 2002mualum on October 25, 2007, 10:55:07 AM
Quote from: Murffieus on October 25, 2007, 08:47:36 AM
I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that TC is the best recruiter here since Al----but the issue is----is he a top 10 recruiter nationally?
At the end of the day, Carroll provided his professional opinion. Now, everybody is entitled to their own opinion, but everybody needs to realize that a guy that does this for a living has a better perspective on recruiting then most/all of us on this board.
Okay, so the next time when watching ESPN that Jeff Brantley tells me if he could pick one guy he'd start his team WITH A CLOSER (!), or the next time Steve Phillips or Eric Young or John Kruk or Rick Sutcliffe or one of those other dolts says something completely idiotic, I should take what they have to say and trust it -- afterall, they get paid for their "professional" opinion, right?
That's arguably the silliest thing I've read here.
And Chicos -- the question wasn't comparing Crean to the rest of past coaches at Marquette, it was comparing Crean to the current crop of coaches all around the country in the NCAA. So I don't see what, 'how have past MU coaches faired?' has to do with anything.
TC is great at PR----he's on the phone to the internet and TV reporters all the time-----he gets better reviews than he should as result!
CW but comparing him to other coaches in the country is kind of silly. They have football, their own arena, bigger budgets, better weather, etc. It's not apples to apples.
That's why I asked what other MU coaches have pulled in 5 star recruits? Or for that matter, what other coaches are waiting in the wings to come to MU and pull in 4's
the "what other coaches are waiting in the wings" argument is tiresome. It is not a question that can be answered by anyone on this board. we have no idea who would apply for the job. but the way you constantly refer to it makes me believe that you think if Crean were to leave that Marquette basketball would be screwed. Marquette basketball is bigger that Tom Crean. That absolutely irritates the hell out of me among all the Crean worshippers. I appreciate what he's done absolutely but if he were to leave the basketball program will not fold up its tent and go home. The administration at Marquette will not allow that and the job is a heckuva lot more attractive than people give it credit for.(and yes, again Crean is to be credited for that)
Quote from: Murffieus on October 26, 2007, 12:52:34 PM
TC is great at PR----he's on the phone to the internet and TV reporters all the time-----he gets better reviews than he should as result!
And you know this... how?
Spycams? Wiretaps? Or are you hiding behind that "inconspicuously" over-sized plant in his office as you type this?
Quote from: CWSKeith on October 26, 2007, 12:45:38 PM
Quote from: 2002mualum on October 25, 2007, 10:55:07 AM
Quote from: Murffieus on October 25, 2007, 08:47:36 AM
I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that TC is the best recruiter here since Al----but the issue is----is he a top 10 recruiter nationally?
At the end of the day, Carroll provided his professional opinion. Now, everybody is entitled to their own opinion, but everybody needs to realize that a guy that does this for a living has a better perspective on recruiting then most/all of us on this board.
Okay, so the next time when watching ESPN that Jeff Brantley tells me if he could pick one guy he'd start his team WITH A CLOSER (!), or the next time Steve Phillips or Eric Young or John Kruk or Rick Sutcliffe or one of those other dolts says something completely idiotic, I should take what they have to say and trust it -- afterall, they get paid for their "professional" opinion, right?
That's arguably the silliest thing I've read here.
And Chicos -- the question wasn't comparing Crean to the rest of past coaches at Marquette, it was comparing Crean to the current crop of coaches all around the country in the NCAA. So I don't see what, 'how have past MU coaches faired?' has to do with anything.
Interesting point... and let me clarify my position.
John Carroll, from Scouts Inc works closely in the world of recruiting, so I trust his opinion more than most people because he does it professionally (he works with recruiting stuff everyday, not just 10min of internet research a day like some of the "experts" around here)
Comparing him to the analysts that you list above isn't accurate. Those guys are often more like mouthpieces for entertainment then they are true analysts. Look at guys like Olney, Gammons, Campbell, Kurkjen, Rob Neyer, etc. Those guys are fantastic analysts. Why don't you compare John Caroll to them? What makes you believe he's like Steve Phillips? I would compare him more to a true journalist because the majority of his communication is written, and not sensationalized like sportscenter or baseball tonight.
I'm not saying you should blindly believe everything a professional sportswriter says. But, let's be honest. NOBODY on this board has the knowledge about college recruiting that John Caroll does. We just don't. You may not like his opinions, but I'm sure he has a pretty good idea on what he is talking about.
Again, you may not agree with him, but for people to jump on to an internet message board and start spouting off about how he is wrong is silly. The guy was asked (in an interview) for his professional opinion. He provided it, and I for one am glad that he thinks so highly of our current coach.
The bottom line is where does he rank nationally in a combination of recruiting/coaching/etc.
There is no doubt he has put the Warriors back on the map, has increased our profile among potential recruits, regularly in the top 20 national rankings, 3 recent players in the NBA.
I do not know if he is top 10 or not but I would say he is top 25 and MU has NOT had that since Al, and even though Majerus may a top coach now he was not when with MU
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 26, 2007, 01:43:57 PM
Or for that matter, what other coaches are waiting in the wings to come to MU and pull in 4's
Again, this has nothing to do with the subject. You're reading waaaay too much into something that isn't there. I'm not calling for Crean to be fired, I'm not calling for them to bring in a new coach. I'm making a simple statement -- Crean is
not one of the best recruiters in the country, and even if you want to bring up stuff like football, private school, what have you, I'd say it's EXTREMELY difficult to put together the argument that Crean is, in fact, one of the ten best college basketball recruiters in America.
That's not saying he's not a good coach. That's not saying he's a BAD recruiter. It's saying he isn't one of the ten best recruiters in the country, nothing more.
If Crean were one of the best recruiters, kids wouldn't be opting for other schools and he'd certainly have brought in a legit big man by now especially with all the playing time he can offer. Effort and time spent recruiting are not directly proportional to success in recruiting.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on October 26, 2007, 07:08:22 PM
If Crean were one of the best recruiters, kids wouldn't be opting for other schools and he'd certainly have brought in a legit big man by now especially with all the playing time he can offer. Effort and time spent recruiting are not directly proportional to success in recruiting.
Well, here's what I know...we're sitting here in October ranked 12th in the country with one of the best backcourts in the nation, picked to finish 3rd in the best conference in the country. Now, he's either a good recruiter and lousy coach to get those accolades, or a lousy recruiter and unbelievable coach or maybe just a "good" recruiter and "good" coach.
Whatever the case may be, the whining and bellyaching is interesting for a team that is on the cusp of the top ten and should (barring injuries or something terrible) have a terrific year. A year in which we should be able to build on recruiting even more.
I, for one, am looking forward to this season and applaud whomever it was that got these players to come to MU and play for this coach....a team worthy of a #12 ranking in the country out of 339 DI teams....the top 4% in the country.
Go MU.
OK, if Crean isn't one of the top 10 recruiters in the country, show me 10 guys who recruit better than him AND graduate their players. And please don't tell me graduating players isn't important.
Reeder, I'm a creature of history....I look at the last 40 years of MU basketball and for that matter, Midwest basketball at bball only schools, I'm sorry but there aren't a lot of schools doing what we are doing are there?
You're right, there could be the next Wooden ready to take over but my guess is that it's more likely the next KO, or Deane, or Wainright, Meyer jr....good coaches, but none of them putting us on the map like we are now.
The days of Ray Meyer and Al McGuire are over. Schools like ours have been used as stepping stones. I'm thrilled we have a coach right now that is good enough to deliver a #12 national ranking, higher than ANY of our rivals, and is now working on year number 9 in a long term contract.
I go with the bird in hand if the bird is good. If he wasn't, then you have an argument.
Chicos----we are a top 12 team preseason----remains to be seen if we are top 12 at seasons end.
Also, the reason we haven't been able to recruit a "big guy" is that all our bigs do is set screens for guards on the perimeter----no one of any quality wants to come in here and do that----Al emphasized the "aircraft carrier" in his game plan----when TC starts to do the same there will be plenty of bigs lining up to come here!
Quote from: 4everwarriors on October 26, 2007, 07:08:22 PM
If Crean were one of the best recruiters, kids wouldn't be opting for other schools
Please name the one coach/recruiter who has never lost out on a kid to another school.
Quote from: ecompt on October 26, 2007, 07:27:32 PM
OK, if Crean isn't one of the top 10 recruiters in the country, show me 10 guys who recruit better than him AND graduate their players. And please don't tell me graduating players isn't important.
No doubt graduating players is important. So important, in fact, that recent reports have James, McNeal and Matthews all on target to finish in three years.
Now that's remarkable! I know I didn't know anybody at Marquette that came close to pulling that off.
Murff: You should know better. Until Chones came along, Al's players were all 6-5 and under. And Jerome Whitehead was hardly the focal point of the NCAA champs' offense. And, again, there is NO, none, zero, zilch comparison between Al's recruiting and what TC has to go through.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on October 26, 2007, 08:03:10 PM
Quote from: ecompt on October 26, 2007, 07:27:32 PM
OK, if Crean isn't one of the top 10 recruiters in the country, show me 10 guys who recruit better than him AND graduate their players. And please don't tell me graduating players isn't important.
No doubt graduating players is important. So important, in fact, that recent reports have James, McNeal and Matthews all on target to finish in three years.
Now that's remarkable! I know I didn't know anybody at Marquette that came close to pulling that off.
I could have done it in 3 years...ended up taking 5 years. I kept adding majors and minors. I took summer school each year and graduated with a boatload of credits that's why it took so long, but with the summer classes I took, I could have been done in the second part of the summer after my Junior year in terms of credit counts.
I don't know what the requirements are today, but back then I usually took 18 credits a semester with the occasional 15 or 16, plus 6 credits per summer session (there were two sessions). That puts you at 44 to 48 credits per calendar year. Back then you needed 128 to graduate I think from A&S...I could be off but it can be done. Most kids do 15 credits a semester and no summer school, so it takes 4 years. Other majors / schools require 150 credit hours if I recall so it all depends on the college within the university you are graduating from.
Quote from: Murffieus on October 26, 2007, 08:00:27 PM
Chicos----we are a top 12 team preseason----remains to be seen if we are top 12 at seasons end.
Also, the reason we haven't been able to recruit a "big guy" is that all our bigs do is set screens for guards on the perimeter----no one of any quality wants to come in here and do that----Al emphasized the "aircraft carrier" in his game plan----when TC starts to do the same there will be plenty of bigs lining up to come here!
Very true, but since we can't see the future we only have a preseason poll. Whether or not we are top 12 at the end of the season, I have no idea. I hope we are, in the mean time I'm happy for the guys and happy for the fans.
ecompt-----Al had a dumpy campus, an antiqated playing facility, and cold winters-----TC still has the cold winters, but has a much improved campus, a state of the art practice facility, and the legacy of the McGuire years to back up his recruiting efforts-----I'd say TC's job is a lot easier tan Al's was!
BW----Al didn't have the bigtime success either until he got his aircraft carrier (Jim Chones)!
Quote from: Murffieus on October 26, 2007, 09:05:40 PM
ecompt-----Al had a dumpy campus, an antiqated playing facility, and cold winters-----TC still has the cold winters, but has a much improved campus, a state of the art practice facility, and the legacy of the McGuire years to back up his recruiting efforts-----I'd say TC's job is a lot easier tan Al's was!
BW----Al didn't have the bigtime success either until he got his aircraft carrier (Jim Chones)!
I just don't agree with that John. Al also had the advantage of no Big East conference, only about 190 programs, we were an independent which gave us a huge advantage of getting into the tournament, very little tv, more scholarships.
Today, 339 teams, reduced scholarships so more teams are good then ever before, the Big East took away the east coast pipeline MU had for so many years, players jumping to the pros like crazy now, tougher NCAA educational and recruiting standards then what Al had to deal with, tv tv tv tv.....every team is on tv so kids don't just gravitate to 10 schools.
I'm almost positive that in one of the various Al books, he stated that one of the reasons for him retiring was how college bball was changing. One of those things was recruiting.
Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on October 26, 2007, 08:03:10 PM
Quote from: ecompt on October 26, 2007, 07:27:32 PM
OK, if Crean isn't one of the top 10 recruiters in the country, show me 10 guys who recruit better than him AND graduate their players. And please don't tell me graduating players isn't important.
No doubt graduating players is important. So important, in fact, that recent reports have James, McNeal and Matthews all on target to finish in three years.
Now that's remarkable! I know I didn't know anybody at Marquette that came close to pulling that off.
I graduated in 4 years with a double major in accounting and finanace with 152 credits (need 150 to take the CPA) and never took a single summer class. Could have very easily graduated in 3 years with only one major. I knew quite a few kids that graduated in 3 1/2 years with no summer school. To graduate in 3 years, especially if you take summer classes isn't unreasonably difficult; especially if you are forced to study.
Chicos, I, too, think the bird in hand isn't too bad..., but if I could be assurred that the next guy would be another KO, I'd be a little less easy to please. In the few years KO was here, he brought in arguably the best recruiting class ever at MU, took us from the Bob Dukiet division 3 mentality to the sweet 16! (with a win over Kentucky).
Murff, you have 300 colleges competing for top talent now. These kids start getting letters from coaches when they're in seventh grade. There's simply no comparison. And the reason Al got Chones was BECAUSE he had already built a Top Ten program with little guys.
Quote from: augoman on October 26, 2007, 10:42:07 PM
Chicos, I, too, think the bird in hand isn't too bad..., but if I could be assurred that the next guy would be another KO, I'd be a little less easy to please. In the few years KO was here, he brought in arguably the best recruiting class ever at MU, took us from the Bob Dukiet division 3 mentality to the sweet 16! (with a win over Kentucky).
Very true....but he couldn't wait to get out of here which is the other piece of the puzzle I mentioned...not being used as a stepping stone.
I'd rather take the current bird in hand that is doing equally good things (if not better than KO) and is still here.
TC is a great recruiter, not a good closer of Top 50 talent--yet. Al hated to recruit, but could close. TC has done a great job of taking talented kids who are just a a bit below physically for the NBA profile. DW3, Travis, the three amigos, Lazar, Ooze, Novak (slow foot speed). The fact is, DePaul has had a better NBA record recently than TC, yet we have had the better college team. Why? Top 50 players want to go into the NBA early. Our program cannot sustain that yet like UNC, but TC now has us on the hunt. IS didn't pick UNC or MU, but GT because he can play today and get into the NBA next year (we have too many good guards who will be here a couple of years).
The NBA will always take the young Bigs in the lottery every year...the younger the higher as all they see is potential. Aaron Gray could have been a lottery pick in past years...waited and was picked in the second round. Skiles may start him this year over Noah. That was a big drop in the bank account to stick around to help his team try and win the BE and NCAA. It worked for Noah...but why gamble on MU if you are a Top 50 recruit unless you can play today? Not until we take the next step in the tourney, which may be this year.
MU has quite a few things in its favor for a recruit: Great b-ball history, a coach always in the press, top line b-ball facilities, NBA city, visiting site for NBA teams, on cable all the time, a winning program under TC, DW3, academics, and usually chance to play as a frosh. Things a 4 star recruit with hope will look for.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 27, 2007, 12:57:25 AM
Quote from: augoman on October 26, 2007, 10:42:07 PM
Chicos, I, too, think the bird in hand isn't too bad..., but if I could be assurred that the next guy would be another KO, I'd be a little less easy to please. In the few years KO was here, he brought in arguably the best recruiting class ever at MU, took us from the Bob Dukiet division 3 mentality to the sweet 16! (with a win over Kentucky).
Very true....but he couldn't wait to get out of here which is the other piece of the puzzle I mentioned...not being used as a stepping stone.
I'd rather take the current bird in hand that is doing equally good things (if not better than KO) and is still here.
There seems to be an attitude that teams just pick from a large pool of "Kevin O'Neills" and that someone of that quality is the worst possible outcome from a coaching change.
DePaul has been trying for years to get back to the level that Ray Meyer brought the program.
Dayton hasn't come close to the level they were at under Don Donoher
Loyola was a national championship team at one time.
Detroit was a top 25 condender under Dick Vitale.
St. Johns has been trying to regain the glory of the Lou Carnesecca years.
This confidence that we shouldn't be concerned about a coaching change is extremely misguided. Lets face it, Bob Dukiet was a successful and promising coach before arriving at MU. You simply don't know if past success is going to translate at the next level.
Yup....Minnesota ran out Glenn Mason last year for "only" getting to 7 bowls in 8 years but he wasn't good enough for them. This year, they might be the worse team in Division I football.
Happens all the time, fans get a sense of entitlement based on what happened 30 years ago or 50 years ago, then they smell a little success again believe it must be replicated to what happened back then.
Sports Illustrated has an interesting article on this right now
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/stewart_mandel/10/24/mailbag/3.html (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/stewart_mandel/10/24/mailbag/3.html)
If a BB fan returned to this forum from years of isolation in the Biosphere he would think:
1) Marquette's top 15 ranking is a disgrace to a recent record of being routinely in the top 5.
2) Milwaukee's ambiance and weather are routinely confused with Portofino.
Crean does a nice job, and he keeps it interesting. Ryan, for example, also does a nice job but puts the world to sleep. Be happy with what you have.
Marqptm----if you are suggesting that Al quit at MU because he couldn't recruit anymore-----you're mistaken-----he had as good a talent when he left as he ever had (3 NBA guys and the POY)----so recruiting was NOT a problem for him. Al quit because Norm Fischer at Medalist Industries made him a rich man!
If over the years, things changed recruitingwise, he would have tweaked his technique----but the same bottomline would be there -----Al knew his biz!
Marquette84, I don't believe anyone said that it's easy to pull in a KO-caliber coach, nor implied that desire. Neither was Bob Dukiet a "successful and promising" coach when he came here. He, in fact, was a third choice/desperation to replace the coach from Texas that backed out when they wouldn't release him from his contractual obligations. (he appeared on tv press conference in tears-apogizing). Further, I feel the gist of the quoted posts was that TC (the bird in the hand) IS better than any replacements we may get.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on October 26, 2007, 07:08:22 PM
If Crean were one of the best recruiters, kids wouldn't be opting for other schools and he'd certainly have brought in a legit big man by now especially with all the playing time he can offer. Effort and time spent recruiting are not directly proportional to success in recruiting.
This thread has gone through a ton of twists and turns so I'll just say this:
While Crean has missed out on some big men and some other players (every coach in America misses on players btw), I do still think he's a good recruiter.
He has raised the profile of MU by getting better and better talent to come here. He needs to keep going in order to be considered an elite recruiter, but right now (and given where MU started), Crean has done a great job.
Not everybody here is going to agree with the opinion of John Carroll, but regardless if you agree with him or not, you have to be excited by the fact that Crean is getting mentioned as a great recruiter by a guy like Carroll, who follows recruiting for a living.
Can everybody agree about that? It's at the very least good pub for MU.
Quote from: Murffieus on October 27, 2007, 03:40:44 PM
Marqptm----if you are suggesting that Al quit at MU because he couldn't recruit anymore-----you're mistaken-----he had as good a talent when he left as he ever had (3 NBA guys and the POY)----so recruiting was NOT a problem for him. Al quit because Norm Fischer at Medalist Industries made him a rich man!
If over the years, things changed recruitingwise, he would have tweaked his technique----but the same bottomline would be there -----Al knew his biz!
I don't think this is what he was suggestng - that Al had lost it as a recruiter.
I've heard it said before too, that he didn't like the trend recruiting was taking. The business of getting in on kids so young, perhaps some shady dealings that others were getting into to land the top recruits, etc. It didn't seem like the natural way of going about things, and it played a part in his decision to retire. But it probably wasn't the only reason.
I'm not quite sure what's going on with this thread anymore. All I know is that it won't die.
(http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee41/roblowe14/bunnycake.jpg)
OK, Murff, I get it now. We're not supposed to listen to what Al said was his reason for retiring--the reason he gave me in a one-to-one interview and he one he gave to thousands of journalists over the years. You know better. Oh, by the way, you still haven't backed up your claim that Iman said he didn't come to MU because of the lack of a big man. Show me that quote, please.
Quote from: Henry Sugar on October 29, 2007, 11:15:52 AM
I'm not quite sure what's going on with this thread anymore. All I know is that it won't die.
(http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee41/roblowe14/bunnycake.jpg)
hahaha... nicely put.
Ecompt----I was Al's broker for 12 years---talked to him several times a week----sometimes at length-----he never ever mentioned anything to me about not likeing the trend in recruiting----never. What he did say (and this was several months before he won the NCAA) that he was "tired of coaching kids in short pants"----that everyone should have several careers (things like that). But the main reason for leaving MU was he was offered vice-chairmanship of Medalist Industries, which was a huge sporting goods manufacturer at the time (and did BB game braodcasts on NBC/CBS) where combined he was making a lot more money than coaching-----a lot more.
The main reason he left coaching was MONEY----he said a lot of things to the media for public consumption. Al didn't like recruiting or practice (loved the showmanship opportunity of the games though)-----actually he always was a lazy recruiter-----Hank did most of the leg work and he exposed his players a great deal to recruits, but he was the CLOSER-----he ALWAYS said the right thing to them-----he could sense what they wanted to hear----what buttons they wanted pushed!
That worked back then and it would work today----because pushing the right button today works just as well as it did back then!
Quote from: Murffieus on October 29, 2007, 02:22:21 PM
Ecompt----I was Al's broker for 12 years---talked to him several times a week----sometimes at length-----he never ever mentioned anything to me about not likeing the trend in recruiting----never. What he did say (and this was several months before he won the NCAA) that he was "tired of coaching kids in short pants"----that everyone should have several careers (things like that). But the main reason for leaving MU was he was offered vice-chairmanship of Medalist Industries, which was a huge sporting goods manufacturer at the time (and did BB game braodcasts on NBC/CBS) where combined he was making a lot more money than coaching-----a lot more.
The main reason he left coaching was MONEY----he said a lot of things to the media for public consumption. Al didn't like recruiting or practice (loved the showmanship opportunity of the games though)-----actually he always was a lazy recruiter-----Hank did most of the leg work and he exposed his players a great deal to recruits, but he was the CLOSER-----he ALWAYS said the right thing to them-----he could sense what they wanted to hear----what buttons they wanted pushed!
That worked back then and it would work today----because pushing the right button today works just as well as it did back then!
Murf, do you think there is a coach in the NCAA today that "operates like Al" as you seem to keep saying Crean should do? Seriously, is it?
Obviously, I know Al was a fantastic coach, but the landscape of college hoops has changed greatly, and while some of Al's techniques are timeless, some others probably wouldn't work well in today's game.
Everybody loves the story of Al and Toone getting in a fight. Do you think Crean should punch DJ at halftime to try and motivate him?
You can't just act like everything Al did would work today.
In the book, "I remember Al McGuire..." it is clearly stated that Al did not like what was becoming of the recruiting atmosphere. It talks of kids were recruited too young, schools giving 'gifts', and a general sleazy attribute.
Also states that Al hated to recruit, and having to sell himself to a 17 year old kid is not what he wants to do.
So there ya go, in printed words, Al saying recruiting was changing, and he didn't like it anymore. Not saying that's why he left, but an attribute to it.
The chief attribute of a recruiter is salesmanship-----and the chief attribute of a salesman is knowing what to say-----to push the right buttons. Al could do that----how in the world do you guys think he built the program from the 4 & 25 team he inherited-----by saying the wrong thing to recruits?
Today recruiting is STILL all about salesmanship-----and the MU program has a great deal more going for it today to sell------than in Al's day!
BTW Marqptm-----as i mention above, Al would embellish to the media to build a story -----he would never tell the media the real reason he left coaching-----which was MONEY. Also as I mention above Al NEVER liked recruiting (but there is something about every job that someone doesn't like----but that doesn't mean you quit because of it, that is unless it's unbearable)!
Oh I agree with you Murff. I was just saying, it was stated that he thought recruiting was changing.