RT @CHICKatCSN: I have learned GW Colonials set to hire Mike Lonergan as their new head basketball coach. Press conference set for high noon Monday.

I hope Copes is there.

Yes!!

 Sporting Vermont

CSN

Excellent.

All I can say is I'm happy BM is on board,

Could just be a matter of time, but he has not resigned at UVM as of 30 minutes ago, per John Fantino:  http://twitter.com/#!/JohnFantino

A little more on Lonergan being hired:

http://blogs.gwhatchet.com/courtside/2011/05/05/lonergan-hired-as-mens-basketball-head-coach/?hp

A non-surprise since most knew that all the other guys were window dressing in this process. But I think he will do well and hope he does well. Hopefully the Nero/Lonergan team gets it done.  Lots of local connections for Lonergan so expect GW to vie for local kids again. Now let's see who he brings on staff and whether RH is part of the equation.

I wanted Dooley, but I'm on board.  I think both were solid options.  Go GW!

I wanted Dooley, but I'm on board.  I think both were solid options.  Go GW!

Alright GW Hoops community.  I'm on board now that GW has gone with Lonergan.  I've followed his career very closely at CUA and UVM and am very happy he's coming back to the DC area.  Will be much easier to watch/see games. 

Anxious to see who is named to the coaching staff and to see if he can secure the recruiting class that's in place. 

According to an unnamed UVM source, Lonergan flew to DC today, but has not signed the contract yet (as of this evening).  Seeems pretty clear from all the reports that a deal was agreed to, though.

Interesting how this reporter hedges a bit by saying "seems" like he's headed to GW instead of saying it definitely like Comcast and the Hatchet did. 

www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20110505/SPORTS0101/110505030/Lonergan-seems-headed-George-Washington

ESPN Article 

Lonergan will likely work to keep GW staff assistant Roland Houston, whose nephew Erik Copes, a 6-foot-8 center from Philadelphia, signed with the Colonials. Copes was rated as the No. 6 center in the ESPNU top 100 for the class of 2011.

awesome news

Nothing yet on the school's official site. Was he hired or not?

Like that line about keeping Roland and Erik.

 http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/george-washington-university-expected-to-hire-mike-lonergan-as-mens-basketball-coach/2011/05/06/AFIaxZ3F_story.html

(Sure looks like FQ's beloved reporting-on-reporting is going on as everyone magically has the same story with nothing new to add)

what about us poaching some of vermont's commits?  

The only confirmation that I have seen from Lonergan.

 VermontSports Vermont Sports 

 Nothing on his twitter account yet:

http://twitter.com/#!/MikeLonergan

 Here's a fan site of VT recruits/recruiting targets:

http://www.vtsportsnetwork.com/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=82&func=showcat&catid=11

Here's who ESPN is showing for 2011 commits:

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/recruiting/school/_/id/261/class/2011

• 80
  Four McGlynn, SG

   

   

  • POS Rank SG #150
  • HT 6'1"
  • HS Dallastown H.S. (PA)
  Signed
   
• 78
  Chris Santo, SF

   

   

  • POS Rank SF #121
  • HT 6'4"
  • WT 195lbs.
  • HS Cherry Hill H.S. East (NJ)
  Verbal
   
• 40
  John Kopriva, PF

   

  • HT 6'7"
  • HS Marquette University H.S. (WI)
  Signed

 A better listing thread:

http://www.vtsportsnetwork.com/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=82&func=view&id=14050&catid=11

 Seems to have good ties to NJ basketball. Wonder if Ferd has a kid old enough to be recruited yet?

The Kopriva kid is probably the best of the bunch.  Has good size and is built.  He was a D1 QB prospect so he's very athletic.  

McGlynn is on the same AAU or High School team as Donovan Jack.  I know UVM was looking at him for 2012, but I don't think he would have settled for the AEast.  I konw GW has interest in him.  I imagine that won't change at all for next year.

The most gratifying remark to be made about Lonergan is that Vermont fans who have visited here really do seem to like him and have appreciated his efforts.  Mike replaced a coaching legend in Brennan (at least he was a Vermont legend) and as the saying goes, it is normally very difficult to replace a legend.  So many here have clamored for an X's and O's coach and it now appears that we are getting one.  There is work to be done in making sure that everyone who is scheduled to be on board for next season remains.  Congratulations to Mike and now, let's get it done!

MV, I agree.  We're definitely picking up a guy that the Vermont folks love.  That says a lot.  If he can keep Copes and a majority of the recruits (if not swap in one of his own), I think we ended up on the positive side of this deal.  I was hoping for a Fran Dunphy-like coach, and hopefully we're getting one.

Agreed on the agenday Herve, but it has to happen in a different order:

1) Lock in assistant coaches

2) Recruits/current players

You guys were making jokes about the Tom Dooley song, but here's one by Mark Lanegan's Screaming Trees called "Nearly Lost You." Appropriate, no?

Der, here's the right video

 I voted Dooley in the other thread but I was torn and kinda mentally flipped a coin. Very excited for Lonergan, I think he's a great hire with the experience and the area ties. Looking forward to next season, here's hoping that we keep Copes.

 Wake up Erik!

http://twitter.com/#!/Ecopes_22

Herve, is there a way you can keep this post up forever.  I want to look back and read what posters said: (1) if Lonergan returns GW to the NCAA's; (2) if Lonergan leaves us high and dry after a few years of success; or (3) flops.

Looking forward to the advent of the Lonergan/Nero era at GW but first must thank Jack, Dom and Karl for their many years of  commitment and success in Foggy Bottom. Despite all the criticisms and frustrations expressed here that was directed at them, they deserve credit for raising and meeting the expectations of GW fans. We're all counting on the new team meeting and exceeding their accomplishments.

Lonergan has certainly given consideration to who he wants as his assistants and how he will approach his first days as GW coach concerning the returning players and inked recruits.  Where I strongly differ with some is having any aspirations for poaching recruits already signed to attend Vermont. ML recruited them to be Catamounts, not Colonials, and I'd find it unseemly for him to actively seek their decommitment and re-signing with GW. At the same time, while I would want Lonergan to fairly evaluate our incoming recruits as to how they would fit into his system, I'd hate to see GW playing hardball with any of the 3 recruits who want to reconsider their LOI's.  I'd love to have both Coach Houston and Erik Copes in Foggy Bottom next year but that's a decision that Coach Lonergan will have to make as to what's best for everyone in the long-term. Either way, GW hoops will have a new face and a new personna. Too bad this all gets lost in the shuffle of the GW that will be grabbing all the college basketball attention in this area.

GW is in great shape - Go COLONIALS!

 All you have to do is remember the date "5/5/2011" and put it in the search or use this link:

http://www.gwhoops.com/default.aspx?start_date=5/5/2011

Alas, the "Hobbs signing day" threads are all gone or it would be fascinating to go back and look at those as well.

I'm happy with the hire, and I will be even happier when I hear that all 3 recruits are still on board.  Lonergan will have some talent to work with next year.  It may sound pretty optimistic but I am hoping that GW will be a top 3 A-10 team next year.

So, it's Obama, Steve Case, me, ... and Ray Schoenke, Norm Chow, Michelle Wie, Prince Kuhio, Hiram Bingham - and Joan Blondell, Buster Crabb, Jennifer Nicholson,

...and 2/3's of the original Kingston Trio

thanks, Herve.

Poog - great post.

Lonergan's history doesn't show me much. Catholic U., Gary Williams assistant, then picks up a UVM program that had been doing quite well under Tom Brennan and cant win an AE title. Meh.

But I'll be happy to eat crow on the occasion of our 11th NCAA appearance ... as long as we dont have to wait a decade.

Meanwhile, GW alums Brey and Dooley look ripe for top jobs while Jarvis also seems primed to jump.

Mentz, you and I are viewing this the same way but I've tilted a bit from Dooley is the better choice to the jury is still out.  At least ML has a proven track record for winning games even if the level at which he has won is less than desirable.  Mike Jarvis's resume wasn't radically different (a proven winner as a high school coach and at BU) entering GW than ML's resume.  Of course, he did coach Patrick Ewing in high school.

Assuming that Copes and at least 1 other recruit stays (I'm not at all taking that for granted but am saying this for the purpose of this example), the short-term prognosis is almost to the point of being unfair to ML.  If he wins, he will be winning with KH's kids.  If we were to finish Top 3 in the A10 next season, it would be right at the point that KH would have likely led them.  Over the next few years, Lonergan really has to exceed expectations, and by that I mean not just making the NCAA tournament but doing at least a little damage once they are there, to be regarded as a universal success (again, assuming Erik Copes and at least 1 of the Davis's remain).  After a few years have passed, then it really becomes  Lonergan's ship to sail.

Mentzinger - I think Lonergan has shown that he is a good coach in two different circumstances.   First he won the Div. 3 national championship at Catholic, and I think most schools that win national championships at any level have good coaches.  Second, Vermont lost most of its starting line-up and was picked 4th or 5th in their conference this past year, and they ended up in 1st place.  It would be very difficult for an average coach to have a team with the best record in the conference in a season where they lost all of their key players.

Lonergan has other accomplishments at Vermont, but those two things stick out to me.  It seems like he just has a mind for basketball.  He loves thinking about the match-ups and x's and o's part of the game.  That is the type of coach that appears to be doing well at schools similar to GW (i.e. Richmond, Butler).  I do think Lonergan is a bit of an unknown, but let's hope he goes down that path.  I also think Dooley would have been a good choice too, but they could only pick one.

Mentz, all the BS about Dooley and his record the last 2 years at ECU was 23-31. that's with his own players. i'm not unhappy that Wingnut didnt get the job.

+1

 I'm excited about the fact that Vermont fans seem to worship this guy. Normally when a coach leave fans are pissed off but Vermont people have been saying he's a great coach while wishing him luck. Like the hire. 

MV- I'm  confused when you say that Lonergan will need to do some damage in the NCAA tournament to be viewed as a universal success.  I'm not sure I agree with this.  Everybody viewed Hobbs as successful when he took GW to the tourney.  He hardly did damage there.  But everybody viewed that as success.  I don't know anybody who said "Hobbs faield this program because they didn't win in the tourney."  Granted- people said Hobbs coached poorly in the tourney---but I don't think anybody viewed him as unsuccessful.

I do agree that Lonergan is in a tough spot if the recruits come in.  Theyw ill be viewed as Hobbs players, and we will all be left to wonder whether Lonergan did a better job with  Hobbs players than Hobbs would have done.  That said- I'll give the coach credit for coaching the team- regardless of how they do.  I'll also wait and see how things transpire over the next 3 or 4 years before trying to pass judgment on any sort of "lonergan legacy" for GW.  As we've seen with Hobbs, you can go through virtually two careers in the same decade.  A great one---and a not so great one.  I'd like to see how Lonergan does

For whatever reason, I've always considered Lonergan versus Dooley to be comparable to Larranaga vs. Paul Westhead, turtle v hare, Adam Laroche v Adam Dunn.  Once they determined (Ramsey dictated?) that Hobbs was not their guy,  I think GW made the right choice in selecting Mike Lonergan. He was very highly regarded when he was coaching Catholic U and actually amazed local sportswriters that he was content to stay for so long and not move up the coaching ladder. His transition to Maryland and then Vermont also marked a transformation of his career aspirations vis a vis his continuing strong commitment to family. Folks up in Vermont have obviously been impressed with him and simultaneously wish him well while sorry to see him go...kind of like when Joe McKeown packed his bags and left GW for Northwestern.  He's got ties and contacts in the local area and could conceivably remain in Foggy Bottom for a long time. Dooley may have been the HR slugger opportunity with his recruiting reputation at Kansas but Lonergan would appear to be the high average high on-base solid performer with the proven track record as a head coach.  Copes coming would be fantastic for alot of reasons but regardless, I don't think Lonergan will disappoint next year unless there is a totally unexpected mass defection of players.  Let the new era begin without the seemingly obligatory buyer's remorse before even walking out of the showroom.

Seth Leavitt

Poog -

Lonergan wanted to move up from CUA in a bad way, not because he didn't like it, but because he wanted the challange.  No D1 program would give him an oppertunity.  He had a number of interview Towson, William & Mary, Patriot League teams, I can't recall all of them, but essentially no one wanted to hire a D3 coach, even one that won a National Championship.  That's why he took the assistant job at UMD.  He wanted to eventually become a D1 Head Coach.  After one year at UMD that somehow validated him and he got the job at UVM.  He didn't expect it to come that quickly, that's for sure.

Lonergan is a solid hire who likely will be successful at GW. How successful? Time will tell. We could be on the brink of better days or we could fondly look back at the 2003-2007 years as the zenith of GW basketball. I don't think Lonergan will be disaster in any event. Given that Hobbs was not going to be the coach next year, I don't see how GW could have done much better than Lonergan given their options (again the only guy I would have rather seen here was Pikiell but that was never going to happen). So let's hope it all works out. I think this was a far safer pick than Dooley although I didn't have strong anti-Dooley opinions for the most part.

GW fans have no worries.  Lonergan inherited a depleted program at Vermont.  They had just knocked off Syracuse in the NCAA and graduated all 5 starters.  He brought in good players, ran a squeaky clean program, compiled very good records and led them to post season appearances.  Lonergan is great hire.  Be happy. 

Agree with Dooley and Poog.   Lonergan seems like a low-risk option.  The guy has proven he can win.

I applaud Hobbs for what he did accomplish here, but I can't wait to see what Lonergan can do with Hobbs' players.  So long as the players buy into his system and don't try to fight him, I suspect the results will exceed what they would have been if we maintained the status quo.  Regardless, it should be good in the long run.

I suggest those who favored Dooley (or others) follow Kent Brockman's lead:

www.youtube.com/watch

iframe>

LOL FQ.  That's one of my favorite Simpson's quotes.

I didn't think the point needed clarifying but to reiterate, I (and others I'm sure) would have reasonably expected KH to lead next year's team to the NCAA tournament.  For Lonergan to achieve this goal would be nice, but a first round loss would be perceived exactly as was the case when Penders took Mike Jarvis's players to the NCAA tournament.  This is why I say that Lonergan really needs to exceed expectations over the next few years, in order to separate his accomplishment from one that suggests that the reason he's being successful has everything to do with KH's players.  By contrast, if GW reaches the Sweet 16 next year, I don't think anyone will really care that he got there with KH's players.

If this doesnt work out for GW, please send Lonergon back ASAP

* Lonergan

Mike Lonergan will be a good coach. He def. knows the game. He will have access to better players and recruits there than he did @ UVM. Our program is good and we've earned the respect of many a larger program but it is a hard sell to get top flight players to commit to our school ( see the " highschool gym ") and in a low rated conference.

as the previous post says, we'll take him back asap. Good luck Coach, you are missed already

It would only be perceived that way by you, MV.   I don't tihnk you should try to speak collectively for "how it would be perceived."  I realize it's implied that you are only speaking for yourself, but the tone suggests you are talking about it being roundly perceived that way. 

If Lonergan takes a team to the NCAAs next year after 4 straight years of sub-140 RPIs, I think most people will say, "wow.  What a difference an X and Os coach can make" -- especially those who don't follow it as closely as you and I. 

Honestly, other than a few naysayers, very few would be unimpressed by that quick a turnaround.

MV- I am not going to put words in your mouth---but I am going to tell you how I interpret your words.  Prior to Hobbs being fired you spent plenty of time blasting people for establishing a line for which Hobbs should be fired/retained.  You stated that such a line was arbitrary and didn't take into account things that might occur or not. 

Now that Hobbs is fired, you state that you (and others) would have expected Hobbs to get to the tourney.  This is precisely why the line many of us felt should be drawn at whether he made the tournament--or not.

With that being said, now that Lonergan is the coach, I will not hold him up to heightened expectations to determine whether or not he is successful or unsuccessful.  In fact, I might even give Lonergan a year or two before judging anything as unsuccessful (though admittedly I'd judge success sooner than a lack of success).  If I expected this team to make the tourney- I expect this team to make the tourney--regardless of the coach (frankly, I felt that it was about 50% that the team made the tourney under Hobbs this year).  Success is defined by making the tournament.  The reason he will be successful is because he was able to coach a team (regardless of who brought in the players---and if he retains Houston, he brought in copes)to the tourney.  You appear to be setting a relatively high standard for success for a new coach- solely because he is playing with another coach's players.  

Better to make the NCAA with "Hobbs players" than to be sitting at home in March.  If the fans want to discredit any potential success by claiming the other coach would have done the same thing that's there prerogative.  The fact of the matter is that Hobbs wasn't given the chance in 2011 because of his poor performances of the last few years.  If Lonergan is able to motivate and succeed with these players it will speak to the job he's done and the type of coach he is.

I 'd like to see GW schedule, and beat, a few schools with national reputations, and given GW's recent track record, I'd consider that as much as an accomplishment as getting into the tourney. We've experienced a fair bit of "phantom" success at GW the past ten years, putting up big winning percentages against no-name schools, and using those wins to bootstrap the team into the tourney, and into a flash-in-the-pan No. 6 ranking. Now, phooot! The coach is gone and will soon enough be forgotten, and the No. 6 team receives barely a mention from anybody in the media, having been surpassed virtually in an instant by a Final Four team from across the River.

I'm hoping Lonergan and the new AD will be willing to put this team on the road and take on a few challenges, set up some decent home and home series against Valley and Metro Conference level schools, and play some competitive basketball. 

Good luck to all of them.

Danj, you say that you're not going to put words in my mouth, and then proceed to point out that I "appear to be" setting a high standard for success (and this is in quotes to save you the trouble of saying that you never said I was setting the standard, only that I "appeared to be").  I am not attempting to set any standards.  I am discussing perception.  And my perception (and I believe perceptions of others as well) is that if Lonergan achieves what many feel KH would have achieved and nothing more, that this can't be considered a universal success.  Will I be happy if we make the tournament?  Of course I will. 

FQ, you really do win the award as this site's most manipulative poster.  We both know that if everyone returns next season including the recruits, we have a team that is capable of making the NCAA tournament.  But you seem to be willing to ignore the talent level that KH has assembled by stating that it would be the X's and O's of Lonergan that would be responsible for such an achievement, simply because we hadn't reached this plateau in the past 4 years.

The intent of this discussion was to point out that these circumstances are practically unfair to Lonergan.  He should be expected to take this team to the tournament.  And to Danj's point, there is no contradiction in my saying that Lonergan should be expected to take this team to the tournament when compared to previously telling others that KH should not necessarily be fired if next year's team did not make the tournament.  I am not suggesting that Lonergan be fired if his team misses the tournament next year.

What has Lonergan's scheduling philosophy been in the past?  I realize it is apples and oranges since the AE is pretty much always a 1 bid conference, but just curious if he is an "anywhere, anytime" kind of coach or prefers a cupcake schedule.

Conference play certainly effects this, but even Hobbs might blush:

 http://statsheet.com/mcb/teams/vermont

• 10/11: SOS 231
• 09/10: SOS 307
• 08/09: SOS NA
• 07/08: SOS 315
• 06/07: SOS 250

GWAlum2001 -

It's a difficult situation, UVM has trouble getting anyone respectable to come to their gym in Burlington.  Things like the Bracketbuster allowed them to get a good OOC each year, with a return game the following year.  They earned games against Buffalo, Iona, CofC in recent memory.

Typically they have scheduled two BCS power teams that are obviously road games.  UF, BYU, UVA, UMD, UConn, Pitt, BC, Rutgers in recent years. 

They would usually play 2 or 3 Ivy League teams a year, 2 or 3 MAAC teams a year, and 1 or 2 NEC teams, and 1 or 2 CAA teams. 

I don't think it was a matter of UVM trying to play easy games but I think it was really tough for them to get good competition to play them at home and would have to play road games OOC for the most part.  I know in 09/10 they opened the year with nine straight road games.  I think if given the option he'll schedule fairly aggressively as there were severe limitation at UVM.

MV- let me be clear- you said that you are talking about perception.  And how people "percieve" success.  Isn't that a standard?  How one perceives success is established by the standard by which they define success.  Maybe you set a lower standard- maybe you would perceive Lonergan as being successful if he qualified for the tournamen.  I (and apparently FQ) took your tone to mean that YOU do not believe GW making the NCAA tournament next year equates to "universal success" for Lonergan.  Pardon me for believing that the "perception of success" is different than a "standard for measuring success."  I never said you wouldn't be happy if GW didn't make the tournament- I merely inferred from your post---and still infer from your latter post---that you would only perceive Lonergan to be successful if he does some damage in the tournament---unless you are only speaking for what other people "might" believe- which is kind of silly.

Of course Lonergan should not be fired if he doesn't make the tournament next year.  That would be absurd.  He hasn't had a poor/mediocre 4 year run (after very good years which gave him the extension to then complete the poor/mediocre 4 year run...also, it may be 3 years, my years are running together here).  But if we expect a brand new coach to make the tournament (and do some damage), wouldn't you have expected Hobbs to make the tournament---or lose his job for not succeeding after a pretty poor run?

let me ask you a direct question, since you are speaking of "perception of success."  how would you define "success" for Lonergan next year MV.

poor language I meant "pardon me for believing that the "perception of success" is the same as "standard for measuring success"

 I like it when folks make arguments. It's the analysis of how the argument was made rather than the actual argument itself which makes everyone tired all over.

ML was definitely an "anywhere/anytime" coach - check out the past several years schedule.  Played Maryland, BC, Brigham Young, UConn, Providence, etc - and also played a lot of higher mid-majors.  I know a lot of teams did not want to play UVM since really a no-win situation (besides the money) for them.  Mike's philosophy was that the team doesn't get better if not challenged.  In the America East, only the tourney winner went to post season so going 12-0 against easy non-conference foes did not get you anywhere in the long run.  Though there were plenty of coaches that may have taken the gaudy record over getting better.  We gave UConn a run for their money this year, took Maryland to OT a couple of years ago and beat BC when they were in Top 25 a few years back.  Mike's teams at CU and UVM played a lot like Gary Williams' teams - with hustle, tenacious defense and discipline. GW fans will be very happy with ML.   

Here is the Pomeroy OOC SOS for Vermont:

2006 - 103

2007 - 150

2008 - 274

2009 - 253

2010 - 269

2011 -140

Not thrilling, especially if you credit the first couple of years to his predecesor.

ML was definitely an "anywhere/anytime" coach - check out the past several years schedule.  Played Maryland, BC, Brigham Young, UConn, Providence, etc - and also played a lot of higher mid-majors.  I know a lot of teams did not want to play UVM since really a no-win situation (besides the money) for them.  Mike's philosophy was that the team doesn't get better if not challenged.  In the America East, only the tourney winner went to post season so going 12-0 against easy non-conference foes did not get you anywhere in the long run.  Though there were plenty of coaches that may have taken the gaudy record over getting better.  We gave UConn a run for their money this year, took Maryland to OT a couple of years ago and beat BC when they were in Top 25 a few years back.  Mike's teams at CU and UVM played a lot like Gary Williams' teams - with hustle, tenacious defense and discipline. GW fans will be very happy with ML.   

Thanks for the thoughts (and stats herve and BM).  For the Vermont fans, GW under Hobbs had similiar problems of not attracting programs to the Smitty, though some (including me) blame that on laziness of the Athletic Department and think of it as an excuse.  Seems like next year we will have pretty strong OOC, so that should be consistent with Lonergan's philosphy of playing difficult games to prepare for league play. 

ML was definitely an "anywhere/anytime" coach - check out the past several years schedule.  Played Maryland, BC, Brigham Young, UConn, Providence, etc - and also played a lot of higher mid-majors.  I know a lot of teams did not want to play UVM since really a no-win situation (besides the money) for them.  Mike's philosophy was that the team doesn't get better if not challenged.  In the America East, only the tourney winner went to post season so going 12-0 against easy non-conference foes did not get you anywhere in the long run.  Though there were plenty of coaches that may have taken the gaudy record over getting better.  We gave UConn a run for their money this year, took Maryland to OT a couple of years ago and beat BC when they were in Top 25 a few years back.  Mike's teams at CU and UVM played a lot like Gary Williams' teams - with hustle, tenacious defense and discipline. GW fans will be very happy with ML.   

You know what Herve?  I couldn't possibly agree with you more.  It seems like with one poster in particular, I can't give an opinion without having to explain it, re-explain it, dissect it frontwards, backwards and sideways, etc.

Listening to 1013espn.com from Vermont talk about the situation.  Reconfirming what we know.  Sad thing is that they've talked more GW hoops in the last 20 minutes than DC radio for the last four years.

Congrats George Washington- got yourselves a hell of a coach.  You will find yourselves winning basketball games,  getting excellent recruits and beating out schools that used to beat you out for the same kids.  This happened at Vermont- we won a number of recruiting battles over schools in higher conferences.  

Here's a short-list of the players Lonergan was able to recruit to Vermont in his short time:

Mike Trimboli

Joe Trapani (ultimately transferred to BC, had a great career there)

Marqus Blakely (D League/Houston Rockets)

But what's better than that, is we had a kid like Joey Accaoui become a 12ppg scorer his senior year, and a kid like Evan Fjeld develop into a 1st-team all-conference player their senior years.  Lonergan maximizes his player's abilities.  

Lonergan will also graduate his players and your teams will defend and rebound.  I think his teams will be even better because the players will be a bit higher caliber and will be able to execute his offense better.  

He isn't the type of guy your going to find making balloon animals for the kids at your back yard bbq, he's not going to go all Bruce Pearl and paint his chest orange and excite a crown, but he will be solid and he will win- he's done it at every level of his career.  His substitution patterns will bewilder you at first, but it's something that will grow on you and it's part of his strategy- he likes a deep team. 

He will schedule aggressively- though he was really forced to at Vermont because it was the only way the team could compete at a high level given the overall (lack) of competition in our conference.  

Bottom Line, In six year from now you'll be hoping he's staying at your school the same way UVM fans are today.  Maybe less.  

MV- you never had to re-explain.  I disagreed with you.  I made my points....you said "wow, you took everything I said out of line." 

Crazy that FQ read the same thing I did...

I appreciate all the Vermont fans who have come on the board and given their ML input.  Seem like a class act group!  

ML was definitely an "anywhere/anytime" coach - check out the past several years schedule.  Played Maryland, BC, Brigham Young, UConn, Providence, etc - and also played a lot of higher mid-majors.  I know a lot of teams did not want to play UVM since really a no-win situation (besides the money) for them.  Mike's philosophy was that the team doesn't get better if not challenged.  In the America East, only the tourney winner went to post season so going 12-0 against easy non-conference foes did not get you anywhere in the long run.  Though there were plenty of coaches that may have taken the gaudy record over getting better.  We gave UConn a run for their money this year, took Maryland to OT a couple of years ago and beat BC when they were in Top 25 a few years back.  Mike's teams at CU and UVM played a lot like Gary Williams' teams - with hustle, tenacious defense and discipline. GW fans will be very happy with ML.   

Don't think there's much value in comparing SOS between Vermont and GW since their baseline situations are so much different with the AE being a far lower-rated conference and Vermont's home court being even less appealing to a higher-rated road team than was the Smith Center. I also suspect that GW's SOS will be more a factor of Russ Ramsey and the athletic overview  group insisting on a tougher overall schedule than that favored and pursued under JK and KH. I would ASSUME that GW's conference affiliation and men's basketball OOC scheduling philosophy were topics of discussion when Patrick Nero was interviewed and ultimately hired. Same with Lonergan. Many GW followers expressed dissatisfaction with GW's non-conference schedule, especially those who lapsed on their tickets and attendance of games, I have always expected that right or wrong, GW would be changing its scheduling strategy under a new AD and coach. In fact, movement in that direction had already started before the recent departures occurred.

As far as rating Lonergan's success or failure, I think it's unreasonable and unfair to judge much of anything after 1 year.  His accomplishments shouldn't be diminished just because he stepped into a pre-made situation. Neither should his failures be judged instantly after assuming a situation not of his making.  We can be excited or disappointed by what we see and what we envision after having him as our coach for 1 year.  At this point we should expect nothing but a golden era for GW hoops without having to already draw lines in the sand for failure.

Looking forwrad to seeing what Lonergan can do- with Hobbs players, his own players, and anybody else in between!

Thanks for the background Homeslice.  In terms of Lonergan's substitution patterns bewildering us, we are coming off of a coach who would rotate in an entirely new line-up about every 2 to 3 minutes of game-time.  So we have been down that road.

 From one of the player's twitter account regarding Lonergan: 

@----------- yea had a team meeting w/ him...I'm looking forward to it....I'm going to the press conference monday

Like the sound of that. 

 Yeah, can't compare AE SoS to GW SoS- that's an apples/mangos comparison.  

AE SoS requirements are extremely weak, presumably the A10 has much higher requirements.

Additionally, there is so much volatility among the lower mid-majors year to year that a 150 RPI one season could be 275 when you actually go and play them.  I'm going on a tangent here, but the AE needs to fix their requirements.  

Anyways, the only schools in the AE that put together consistently challenging schedules in the 6 years Lonergan coached at Vermont were UVM, BU, and Albany.  Someone mentioned it earlier, but the year we went to the NCAAs under Lonergan in '10 we started off w/  8 or 9 straight road games.  

We also beat a #14 ranked BC team w/ Jared Dudley at their place in 06-07.  We've beaten Colorado, Rutgers, Milwaukee-Wisconsin, Buffalo, and a bunch of other schools that's really punching aobe our weight.  

now's the time to schedule Maryland.

And of course Vermont beat GW at the 2008 Rainbow Classic in Hawaii....

As did everyone else.

I hope we start a home and home with Vermont.   Great fans who have come to this board, they'd be welcome anytime. And it would be a good matchup, assuming UVM's replacement can keep the mojo going.

home and home would be a great idea! I've become a GW fan, until we meet on the court. GO COLONIALS

 http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20110506/SPORTS0101/110506013/Lonergan-leaves-George-Washington?odyssey=nav|head

http://blogs.gwhatchet.com/courtside/2011/05/06/university-confirms-lonergan-hired-as-mens-basketball-head-coach/?hp

 A few more revealing quotes here:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/mike-lonergan-hired-to-coach-george-washington-mens-basketball/2011/05/06/AFNrCcCG_story.html

Welcome to the Buff & Blue family,  Lonergans & Turners! 

That WaPo article is silent on assistants but like the focus on players today.

Although it's not worth poaching a graduating senior, I hope Lonergan manages rope some equally 'stached players as Evan Fjeld during his tenure.

Man, that guy looks like the dude played by Eric Roberts in "Star 80," the movie about murdered playmate Dorothy Stratten (Mariel Hemingway).

Monday's press conference is open to the public, and starts at noon at the Smith Center. We hope you'll be able to join us there and in the Colonials Club for a reception afterwards.

Here's the Facebook Event.

Bump