The job process also has its own problems.

Quote: Originally Posted By moy23 on 3/21/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 3/21/2010

George Mason? They literally had one good season, nothing before or since. They are not a part of this conversation.

Gonzaga, on the other hand, has signed alot of big-time talent and beat out Pac-10, Big 12 and Big Ten schools for the majority of the guys on their roster over the last few seasons.

And even with that said ... Gonzaga hasn't had anywhere close to the success that Montana has had. The real comparison would be teams that have been ***-kicking top 5 and 10 teams with numerous deep runs, like Memphis under Calipari. And yeah, I'd say they signed top-level talent.

better than duke, MD, UNC, UCLA, etc on a down year? I don't think so. And how many of those zaga players are in the Pros now... compared with the teams I've mentioned

Yes, Memphis was consistently signing some of the top classes nationally. No question. They had the #1 class in the country lined up before Cal . (Or are you talking about Zaga, can't tell? Because the apt comparison is Memphis, not Zaga.)

The more I thiink about it the more I think prestige is not that far off in DI - Lets say we did extend prestige to 20 seasons for a moving baseline... you'd be having the same arguement with Montana.... 20 other teams would have won an NC and another 20 have been there and lost... probably dropping Montana father down than the 15th spot.

In any case, I don't think that Montana should be an A or A+ with zero national championships.

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 3/21/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By moy23 on 3/21/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 3/21/2010

George Mason? They literally had one good season, nothing before or since. They are not a part of this conversation.

Gonzaga, on the other hand, has signed alot of big-time talent and beat out Pac-10, Big 12 and Big Ten schools for the majority of the guys on their roster over the last few seasons.

And even with that said ... Gonzaga hasn't had anywhere close to the success that Montana has had. The real comparison would be teams that have been ***-kicking top 5 and 10 teams with numerous deep runs, like Memphis under Calipari. And yeah, I'd say they signed top-level talent.

better than duke, MD, UNC, UCLA, etc on a down year? I don't think so. And how many of those zaga players are in the Pros now... compared with the teams I've mentioned.

Yes, Memphis was consistently signing some of the top classes nationally. No question. They had the #1 class in the country lined up before Cal . (Or are you talking about Zaga, can't tell? Because the apt comparison is Memphis, not Zaga.)

Fine - use Memphis - how many Memphis players went pro compared to UK (since UK has been only good the last decade) over the last 10 years.

Quote: Originally Posted By lostmyth2 on 3/21/2010In any case, I don't think that Montana should be an A or A+ with zero national championships

totally agree.

You are putting way, way, way too much stock in one deep run for the NT. If you think a team that won the NT 10-20 seasons ago but has just been solid since then would have a higher prestige than a team that's put up the #'s in the last 10 that Montana has, that's crazy (and would mostly confirm that you're just arguing with me because we like arguing with each other).

Now, if it's a team that has a NT and also has a comparable resume in the other seasons, sure. But there are maybe 5-6 teams in Allen that might be able to make that claim. Probably fewer.

A big part of my beef is also being ignored. Moy, take a look at Pg. 1 and compare Montana to Wichita State. I'm sorry, but nothing you can say can justify us being A- and them being B+.

Quote: Originally posted by dalter on 3/21/2010A big part of my beef is also being ignored. Moy, take a look at Pg. 1 and compare Montana to Wichita State. I'm sorry, but nothing you can say can justify us being A- and them being B+.

OK, then lower Wichita St.'s prestige.

Quote: Originally Posted By dalter on 3/21/2010

A big part of my beef is also being ignored. Moy, take a look at Pg. 1 and compare Montana to Wichita State. I'm sorry, but nothing you can say can justify us being A- and them being B+.

Okay - so you are an A- or a 93% prestige.... they are a low end B+ at 87%

Wichita will more than likely drop faster with a NT 1st round loss then you would because they don't have a strong last 4 like you do. You are about as far into the upper-eschelon of prestige in HD as you can be w/o winning a NC and coming from a small conf. Its not going to be easy to push that A- higher w/o a NC.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

The fact that you have had the success that you have had allows for 4 straight seasons of better recruiting (in theory) and Wichita St will have one strong season of recruiting at a B+ if they can not maintain their prestige level. Overall I'd say your team is in a good position to continue the success tthey have had whereas Wichita St may see the results of this seasons recruiting ni about 3-4 seasons. By that point they may be a B prestiige again before the success of this seasons recruiting shows..

Quote: Originally posted by lostmyth2 on 3/21/2010In any case, I don't think that Montana should be an A or A+ with zero national championships.

I can agree with that, I actually wish that in WIS you had to have a title to be able to attain an A+.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 3/21/2010

Quote: Originally posted by moy23 on 3/21/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By zhawks on 3/21/2010
No not at all, don't twist my words, I stated exactly what I meant to say what you were saying about nobody taking the school you had nothing to do with this discussion, that is a problem in the job hiring process and isn't related to the prestige problem we are discussing now.

Also if you are going to argue that it obviously points to you being wrong in the sense of "Nobody will want a c prestige Duke" since nobody wanted to take over your A- Marquette or Delaware (supposedly) it is very obvious that school name matters to coaches and therefore the 'elites' will rise to the top based on attracting good coaches

Oh - somebody will take the job - just not the best coach.