Mick a Candidate for UNLV?

[UCBearcats]

You may not make up your stories but you are incredibly biased.

While I agree with most of what you say (I'm not a big fan of his style, hate his post-game comments, etc) I'd like to know what is your criteria for elite? That way IF Mick ever hits it, we'll know. I assume since you said "again" you are referring to Huggins days, so 1 final four, couple elite 8's, few sweet 16's? Honest question.

I actually wrote what I thought was a very well thought out post explaining my stance on this earlier in the thread. It was about 685 pages ago so good luck finding it.

The cliffs notes version is I'm 33 years old and grew up with our team being ranked every year, high seeds in NCAAs, occasional deep March runs, ect ect ect, blah blah blah. I want our program to get back there and until it does I won't be satisfied.

I don't believe in excuses or saying we can't have this because we don't have that. It's just the way I look at things. I admit I have an agenda, I admit I don't believe in Mick I just get tired of constantly trying to argue with people on this board who completely make up stories to support their arguments. It won't stop me from coming here because I love the UC hoops talk but it wears a man down after a while.

 

[L-T]

It cracks me up in discussions of eliteness, how everyone just focuses on the NCAA. I was just watching sportscenter.and they were discussing Syracuse and Gonzaga and the analyst said..."These are both Power programs, so Gonzaga, a mid-major program, was being looked at on equal basis with Syracuse. They haven't made a final 4. They've only made 2 elite 8's. They've made 18 straight NCAA's. They've been ranked in the top 10 in 7 of those 18 years. They were #1 in the final AP Poll in 2012-2013, yet were knocked out in the 2nd round that year. They're always getting matched up with top teams in made for TV games. We see and hear about Gonzaga all the time. They are an elite program and that is how sportscenter referred to them today. Regular season rankings, league championships, tournament championships, top recruiting classes, NBA players, plus some NCAA success is all part of being an elite program. We are capable of being one, even in a mid-major league. UCONN is looked at as an elite program in our league and their recruiting class is Top 5. Can Mick get us to elite? I say no for one simple reason. He's a poor recruiter.

 

[UCalum08]

It cracks me up in discussions of eliteness, how everyone just focuses on the NCAA. I was just watching sportscenter.and they were discussing Syracuse and Gonzaga and the analyst said..."These are both Power programs, so Gonzaga, a mid-major program, was being looked at on equal basis with Syracuse. They haven't made a final 4. They've only made 2 elite 8's. They've made 18 straight NCAA's. They've been ranked in the top 10 in 7 of those 18 years. They were #1 in the final AP Poll in 2012-2013, yet were knocked out in the 2nd round that year. They're always getting matched up with top teams in made for TV games. We see and hear about Gonzaga all the time. They are an elite program and that is how sportscenter referred to them today. Regular season rankings, league championships, tournament championships, top recruiting classes, NBA players, plus some NCAA success is all part of being an elite program. We are capable of being one, even in a mid-major league. UCONN is looked at as an elite program in our league and their recruiting class is Top 5. Can Mick get us to elite? I say no for one simple reason. He's a poor recruiter.

Its tough because kids aren't lining up to play at UC. With that being said, part of recruiting is being able to connect to the individual and sell. I would agree there needs to be improvement in that area.

 

[BCM]

Its tough because kids aren't lining up to play at UC. With that being said, part of recruiting is being able to connect to the individual and sell. I would agree there needs to be improvement in that area.

The city itself is seeing a resurgence. Let's face it, 2 decades ago to about 5-10 back, Cincinnati wasn't really what I'd call a destination city. With both downtown and uptown exploding with development, the situation has turned around, but we still await that reputation to catch up nationally... which is a whole different ballgame.

These things matter to not only a recruit but anyone seeking a college out. If it is a well known great place to live, you can bet that turns the dial up a few notches, and that situation improves every year.

 

[Bearcat_NTS]

It cracks me up in discussions of eliteness, how everyone just focuses on the NCAA. I was just watching sportscenter.and they were discussing Syracuse and Gonzaga and the analyst said..."These are both Power programs, so Gonzaga, a mid-major program, was being looked at on equal basis with Syracuse. They haven't made a final 4. They've only made 2 elite 8's. They've made 18 straight NCAA's. They've been ranked in the top 10 in 7 of those 18 years. They were #1 in the final AP Poll in 2012-2013, yet were knocked out in the 2nd round that year. They're always getting matched up with top teams in made for TV games. We see and hear about Gonzaga all the time. They are an elite program and that is how sportscenter referred to them today. Regular season rankings, league championships, tournament championships, top recruiting classes, NBA players, plus some NCAA success is all part of being an elite program. We are capable of being one, even in a mid-major league. UCONN is looked at as an elite program in our league and their recruiting class is Top 5. Can Mick get us to elite? I say no for one simple reason. He's a poor recruiter.

Funny you mention them because we were the Gonzaga before Gonzaga. A nationally relevant program from a small conference that had great regular season success but tournament troubles. Now we are so far off the radar that there was basically no mention of this whole UNLV saga on ESPN all...

 

[rogerOH]

One of the problems that Mick has is that Cincinnati is producing so few top players, no Ricky Calloways - Lasalle Tomphson you have to go to Wilmington to find a top !00 player. Who are the best seniors in Cincinnati this year Fleming from Lasalle?

 

[jacobkdoyle]

It's funny that people always point to Cronin's recruiting. Always. People who like him and people who dislike him. Recruiting is the best thing he does imo. It's like I'm the only one who watches the actual games.

 

[L-T]

One of the problems that Mick has is that Cincinnati is producing so few top players, no Ricky Calloways - Lasalle Tomphson you have to go to Wilmington to find a top !00 player. Who are the best seniors in Cincinnati this year Fleming from Lasalle?

The bigger problem that Mick has is that under his watch, Xavier has exploded past us and made us irrelevant in our own city and his personal record against them is horrendous. We may be looked at as #4 in our own state now, so it probably doesn't really matter how many great HS players we produce because we'll just get the scraps anyway.

 

[L-T]

It's funny that people always point to Cronin's recruiting. Always. People who like him and people who dislike him. Recruiting is the best thing he does imo. It's like I'm the only one who watches the actual games.

I don't know the last time when our recruiting class was ranked worth a crap. It never seems to get inside the Top 30. This being the best thing he can do, just makes the rest of his coaching performance look that much worse, because he hasn't recruited very well.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

It's funny that people always point to Cronin's recruiting. Always. People who like him and people who dislike him. Recruiting is the best thing he does imo. It's like I'm the only one who watches the actual games.

he isn't getting the type of class Kentucky does but I think he gets a good group of players. Especially recently. He has hit on more good ones then bad recently. The sad part about last season was it could have been the turning point for the program and him personally. If a few breaks go our way we are league champs, probably win the conference tourney and have a legit shot at the sweet 16 or better if you think we could have beaten Duke. Hopefully with our returning players he can get that done next year. The next two years could be defining years in the program and believe it or not I share the frustration of many that it didn't happen this year. It's because of how close I think we are and the returning players that I wanted Mick back on board. I think he has taken a bunch of unwarranted BS but that goes with being a coach who followed a popular coach. He needs to get it done this year.

 

[IDC]

The bigger problem that Mick has is that under his watch, Xavier has exploded past us and made us irrelevant in our own city and his personal record against them is horrendous. We may be looked at as #4 in our own state now, so it probably doesn't really matter how many great HS players we produce because we'll just get the scraps anyway.

Agreed UC is #2 on the court in the city, but even with Xs "best team ever" there is just as much UC talk, if not more in the city

 

[rogerOH]

Last 5 years or so Xavier has S. Christian- U.C. has K.J. and Cumberland I don't agree that we would get Xavier's scraps on local recruits.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

If you want to compare results between us and X going back 15 years lease someone correct me but they are kicking our behind.

 

[Madman81]

I don't know the last time when our recruiting class was ranked worth a crap. It never seems to get inside the Top 30. This being the best thing he can do, just makes the rest of his coaching performance look that much worse, because he hasn't recruited very well.

who gives a **** how some perverts who watch 15-17 year old kids for a living rank recruits?

 

[rogerOH]

Probably has a lot to do with great AD's- brand new arena -loyal fan base-all in on one sport. There is a reason they continue to replace great coaches with seemingly better ones.

 

[Bearcat Rob]

Recruiting has not been that bad we have had some highly ranked guys (could it be better at times? Yes, but that's the same at almost all schools). Next season assuming cumberland starts( which isn't a guarentee) four of our five starters would be top 100 recruits the only one who wasn't would be troy who clearly should have been comfortably in the top 100. Each of the past 4 classes appear to have a stud all conference player in it starting with troy(already first team as junior) then Gary (already second team as sophomore) then evans( sky's the limit for him) and now we have cumberland coming in as a top 50 guy who looks like an absolute monster on the scoring end. We need to start doing better in the tournament but some of that has to do with luck and match ups which hopefully start favoring us. This year and next year should tell a lot about our program and cronin I fully fully expect sweet 16s as a minimum.



As for this xavier talk, they had one great season in which they lost in the round of 32 (very similar to sk's senior year. They've missedthe round of 64 twice in last 5-6 years and one of those years even missed the NIT. They have had extremely favorable match ups and luck when they do get in the tournament. Here's a serious question for those who think xavier is so good these days. When's the last time they beat a single digit team in the tournament??? I'll wait for an answer because I know uc's last time was last year don't remember xu's. Also if you look at the final polls after the season for the last 6 years Uc has finished higher in 4 of the 6 I believe. So yes they have had success head to head but you got to look further into than that

 

[TheRealUC]

who gives a **** how some perverts who watch 15-17 year old kids for a living rank recruits?

Lol, while I wasn't gonna put it so bluntly, you're right with this assessment. Classes are ranked based on recruit ranks which are extremely subjective. SK was a 3 star recruit and turned out to be a stud. There have been other players that may not get enough "stars" to help out class ranking but they are good players

 

[bearcatbacker82]

Lol, while I wasn't gonna put it so bluntly, you're right with this assessment. Classes are ranked based on recruit ranks which are extremely subjective. SK was a 3 star recruit and turned out to be a stud. There have been other players that may not get enough "stars" to help out class ranking but they are good players

Lol. Think about jermaine Lawrence too. He was a top 100 player and he washed out here and Manhattan. Rankings really don't amount to much unless you are Kentucky, duke, UNC. Those teams get NBA players that know they are there for one year.

 

[waterhead]

I always found the "recruit rankings don't mean much" argument to be a bit disingenuous. When most people talk about wanting 5 star kids or 4 star kids they are talking about a general grouping of recruits. I haven't heard ANYONE argue that each and every 5 star will pan out or that you cant find a 2 or 3 star kid that will out perform their ranking. I have never met anyone who can't grasp the concept that there are many exceptions to this rule in every class.

That being said. On average (as a group) the 5 stars will out perform the 3 star kids. That is precisely why we would like to see more of them in the program. Because on average they will be better players as a group. Pointing to individual exceptions to a rule has never been a very convincing argument to me...at least on this subject anyway.

 

[Bearcat_NTS]

Lol, while I wasn't gonna put it so bluntly, you're right with this assessment. Classes are ranked based on recruit ranks which are extremely subjective. SK was a 3 star recruit and turned out to be a stud. There have been other players that may not get enough "stars" to help out class ranking but they are good players

S-M-*******-H