We have apparently swung and missed on many recruits this year thus far. While I realize there is more time to go and perhaps we will recover, the questions that beg to be asked are:

Are we aiming too high and missing on kids we can't get for any number of reasons?

Have the reported transfers made us look like damaged goods. In other words is the word out on the street - don't go to GW under ML? Kids do talk and have multiple AAU connections.

Did we get blindsided by the de-commitment and the transfers and this is a temporary one year cluster fuck?

Is our style of play hurting us on the recruiting trail - i.e. ML takes away too much freedom, kids don't want to play in flex etc?

Is it just bad luck?

Are we cursed?

Obviously some of these are not serious questions and it may be more than one of these things at play. Also, we may not really ever know for sure. Thoughts?

I think partially it's a matter of swinging high.  Almost all of the kids we missed on have gone to BCS schools.  Still, I would've expected we sign more than just Griffin by this time.

I think the underperformance of the team compared to pre-season expectations, especially in the begining of the season, defused much of the buzz around the Lonergan Revitalization and kids decided to wait and/or go elsewhere.  This is a case where getting people in to see the games live or on TV might have actually hurt us.

It could also be that when kids visited (many, many did), they were turned off by the chemistry (or lack thereof) between the players and the coaches.  When you lose this many players in one season, it couldn't have been all kumbaya behind the curtains.

I would be far more concerned over the long run if the kids who were transferring were ML recruits rather than KH recruits.  Further, in terms of who is leaving, as I stated earlier, Pellom and Kromah may be transferring to enhance their own future (nothing wrong with that) as opposed to any dislike of the coach.  Davis left because it was clear that he had no basketball future on GW.  The one thing that really stung the most, is the loss of Nigel Johnson.   As for his loss, I have no reason to believe it was for any reason other than what he stated, namely that he committed too soon and he wanted to see what else was out there, given the great senior year he had.  As for aiming too high, the fact was we had to set our sights higher, to again become competitive in a good conference.  I would rather us patch something together for next year (even if it means juco or 1 year transfers) than sign a player who lacks the ability to compete in the conference.  Hopefully, that will not be necessary.  I will be curious where we are in terms of a roster in 30 days.

Maybe having a message board that alerts recruits to negative reasons before the signing period is over - or just trashes guys rumored to have interest - is part of the problem?

but seriously, why don't we wait until after the recruiting/ transfer period is over before we declare he patient dead, let alone publish the obituary. 

Ummm Free did you happen to notice that the patient is now on life support? Apparently the best we can do is hope that Loyola cast-offs will consider us now.

Free you are more and more sounding like our old "friend" (the poster known as Blue Seats) in your defense of ML. Even you can't be happy with what has transpired the last few weeks.

Not really such a joke FQ.  Vander Blue was a verbal commit to Wisconsin when many (or at least some) Badger fans went on their message board to express their disapproval.  Vander read the comments and ultimately switched his allegiance to Marquette.  Last I checked, he had a pretty nice tournament run. (And the Badgers most certainly did not.)

In a perfect world, common sense would prevail and we'd question the type of kid who could possibly be influenced by a message board.  Yet, the reality is this does happen.  It's one reason (among others) why I'm reluctant to attack players.  (Constructively criticizing is not attacking..just thought I'd mention this.)

The other big factor that has led to us striking out on higher regarded players has been the demise of the A10.  Instead of being one of the top 5-8 conferences in America, the A10 will likely fall somewhere in the 10-15 range when all is said and done.   

MV, you may be right in part but if you notice some of the kids we are losing out on were considering other A-10 programs or CAA programs. Take Severe for example. So I'm not sure it has as much to do with conference as we may think.

 The stinger with Severe is he KEPT Fordham and Duquesne and cut GW. Ouch.

I get the Fordham thing. It's a local school. But Duquesne!?!?!

Apologies in advance for speaking a candid truth that some will not like.

Aiming high? Yes (not necessarily a bad thing)

Kids don't like the flex system? Absolutely yes

Is ML developing a bad rep for being harsh on the players and overcoaching? Yes

Transfering students hurt? Absolutely yes (maybe more to come)

Things maybe getting worse? Maybe (particularly if Sutton leaves and Hajji stays)

Did some of these things have an impact on Nigel Johnson? Absolutely yes

Is ML the next Gerry Gimelstob? Not yet but getting closer.

Almost every name off this list (plus many more since the last update) is crossed off.  That's serious underperformance at this point in time in my book.  We may still end up with a decent freshman class, but it will have to count as a hail mary win if you've sung and missed on so many players (did I mix enough sports analogies?)

 Free Quebec you have to be kidding me. You  and Bobo were leading the Bash Hobbs charge when he was here even though he was still recruiting kids who could have theoretically read this board. 

To think Kromah and Pellom would leave "to enhance their own future" is absurd, as is the notion Davis or Guest would have left, (or in Davis' case not even given a chance) if Hobbs were still the coach. Warren is another story so I won't go there.

A coaching change was made that most here feel was for the better, so accept the collateral impacts of that change. But consider that during his hire there was a discussion about the way ML handles players. Some of you may want to go back and read that. Not all players are willing to accept his "leadership" style or his style of play, especially for a generally forgotten program. If Sutton (and/or Strickland) leave, that would hurt more than the current exodus of players. And Thinker is right, there could be another player leaving but it seems less likely as the days go by.

FQ was not the Hobbs basher so don't lump him in with that guy, Bobo.

Subtlety and sarcasm confuse Guy.

I'm spending most of my time these days going on rival boards, pretending to be a booster and instead bashing incoming recruits.  My theory is that the recruits will read them and run away from those schools. I've targeted Duke, Georgetown, Maryland, Seton Hall and Liberty Universities first.  It seems like a fool proof plan but so far no luck.

I don't really care what the success ratio that the GW coaches achieve with their recruits, they really just need 1 more good recruit and 1 or 2 transfers to be a successful off-season.  That's true whether they target just 1 more kid or 100.  Add them to the 5 good freshmen they brought in last year they'll be fine.  After having the best team in terms of RPI/Pomeroy?Sagerin last year of the last 6 seasons at GW, I'm don't see why all the negativity on this board.

Bobo, it's always nice to see you mock a viable theory particularly after I provided  a real-life example of this theory being applied.  It sounds like this:

Me: Recruits can be turned off by the negativity on a message board and Vander Blue is a real example of someone who decommitted and went to a (somewhat) rival school as a result.

You: This is a ridiculous theory......because I say this is a ridiculous theory.

Here we go ... CBO way to light the match.

Perhaps the biggest issue is we started four freshman last year.  Imagine if we had started four seniors.  I think the perception that we have young guys who may be locked into starting positions could be dissuading players from coming.  The only real thing that GW can offer guys right now is playing time.  But if they feel that they will need to compete for a starting position, then a player like Nigel Johnson could pick Fordham over GW, where he knows he has a starting job waiting for him.  I truly believe that playing time is all our program has to offer top recruits right now.  There have just been too many down years that have reduced the stature of the program. Other than playing time, how do we recruit over a BCS level school, or even a school like VCU, where they have a hot coach, and strong local fan support?  

All that being said, I am surprised that ML and staff have not been able to make a more convincing argument to top players that they are going to see a lot of action at GW.  We are desperately short on players next year.  You would think that most top level guys would see that if they come to GW, they are looking at 15-20 minutes of playing time per game right away.  There have to be some top players who hear that and believe it.  So why aren't they closing the deal with those guys?

ML has stated a few times that his recruiting strategy is a mix of local and international.  Find great players in the DC area who want to stay close to home, and find international players who want to play in DC versus some small town they have never heard of.  It is a great strategy - it is perhaps the only viable recruiting strategy for a school like GW.  But does ML have the coaching staff to implement this strategy?  If not, he should look into bringing on some new assistants who have better ties on the international and local levels.

 CBO raises many cogent points. Not,  surprisingly, he is followed by well known apologists for the program. I am under whelmed by ML so far. I believe he has had many unrealistic recruits in sight. When you recruit at Gonzaga High, you compete with Catholic schools I.e. Villanova and Xavier that have a distinct advantage among parents and guidance counselors. Point guards with or without shooting abound in all urban areas.  Where are these recruits? The fact the GW might enter next year without  another ball handler tells me that another sub 500 season is a real possibility. ML is treading in deep water and I am not convinced of his ability to swim.

this thread in some ways answers its own question.  the fact is it is very difficult to recruit top players when you just finished a season with four freshman starters.  any incoming freshman knows that he has to beat out a starter to gain minutes.

can you imagine a high school point guard being recruited by one coach saying there's a good chance you can start immediately and another saying you can be a backup point guard for the next three years. 

and, finally, as others have said, wait until we know the recruiting class.  in fact wait until next year and we see the players.  the best example -- no one had ever heard of alexander koul until we saw him in uniform. 

LP--Actually, I think we saw Koul in Smith with a traveling squad the year before his freshman year at GW. Otherwise, you are on point. There are foreign nationals, JUCOs, who we have not seen, and who can help. Maybe even some American Indians. Its a big world. Its premature to panic.

"Is ML the next Gerry Gimelstob? Not yet but getting closer."

Cheap Shot. 

It seems that we are now going after the local and international players. However, its seems that aiming high and staying in the local area does limit us somewhat. The last NCAA tourney highlighted some great recruits around the country that were never offered a scholarship. DC is an attraction for players in the hinterlands. Must be a better way in trying to attract these guys.  As for the flex, I still didn't get an answer if this is the only offense ML plays, or he just uses it because of the personnel.

The flex is ML's preferred base offense. He has stated many times he'd like to have more of a transition game if he had the players and depth.

That Jack London story is a real killer, herve. Every time I read it, I keep thinking it will turn out differently. Not so.

 Meanwhile, the pressing concern on the women's side is when incoming recruit Shannon Cranshaw will recover and get back in the gym after having had two wisdom teeth pulled and who the new assistant coach will be. Given all the guards Tsipis will have next year, maybe they can help the men fill out the roster for practice.

OK, I'll give more straightforward responses: 

To Dr. Basketball: 

1) Your coment that the best we can do is hope for Loyola cast-offs is really dumb.  I mean classic message-board inanity (and believe me, I've spouted plenty myself, so I know it when I see it).  How would you possibly know who they are going after?  Just becasue someone on an anonymous message board said that we should go after a Loyola cast-off doesn't make it our only option.

2) For the record,  I am not happy with what has transpired, but I am still excited about our 4 freshmen from this past year, about the improved play on the court, about how hard they played, and about the potential ahead.  Losing Nigel is a buzzkill because he could have been the star of an NCAA team if he came here (and especially rough because his verbal may have influenced Rene Castro to go where there is less competition). 

But, I'd add getting Lonergan's guys in here was always going to be the key to our longtetrm success so while the Pellom and Kromah losses are tough to take this year, in the long run they don't mean much to our program (unless they kept a guy like Nigel from coming, which is very possible).   I would add that the Pellom loss was expected, Kromah loss was predicted all year by Thinker (despite Kromah's many flaws, I was still surprised and disappointed that the coaches let it gete to the point he would leave), and if Mikic leaves that would be no surprise and probably no great loss.     

3) You can compare me to Blue Seats if you want, but my history on this board is defending coaches/the direction of the program when I think it's warranted (like early in the  Hobbs years when others were calling for his head after the AU loss), calling for a new direction when it's clear we aren't getting back to the tourney again under that coach (like late in the Hobbs years), and generally calling it like I see it.

To Thnker: 

4) I agree with every answer in your post, until the end. I do think it's possible that the transfers and blunt coaching style have affected recruits, though there's no way to know.  On the Gimmelstob comparison, that seems a bit harsh to eeven suggest.  As I understand it, Gimmelstob was a screamer in the Mike Rice mold who alienated his players by being a dick.   Lonergan is an extreme attention to detail to guy who knows basketball so well that he can see flaws instantly, and can't help but point them out.  Some players are not going to react well ot that kind of attention to detail and bluntness. Maybe those skills eventually stunt his development as a coach, but all we really know is that he took a team relying heavily on 3 freshmen - and starting a 4th for part of the year - and got them to be competitve in almost every game, while being the most efficient team we've had in 6 years.  Most outside observers think the trajectory is pointing way up for GW, so while it's possible the whole thing could collapse in mutiny, that seems unlikely. 

5) If you want to make a comparison, perhaps it's to Jarvis at St. John's, where the AAU coaches turned on Jarvis because he was too honest and wouldn't play the game the way they demanded.  Maybe the AAU crowd will never be down with Lonergan because he plays a different style from what they prefer and because he doesn't coddle the players like they want?   I don't know, but perhaps ML has to figure out a way around the AAU guys to land the great players (like he did with Garino and Larsen).

To Cutis: 

6) You are always underwhelemed - especially by Omar Williams.  I do agree that if we don't get another ball handler, .500 will be tough (unless we go back to Hobbs-level scheduling, in which case we'll be .500 easy), but if you didn't see progress on the court this year, you don't know basketball. The product we watched this year was better than it's been since 2007.

To Lowpost: 

7) Thank you. Well put.
 

To Herve: 

8) Good point.   ML has repeatedly said he wants to run more, when he can.  And if there's one thing we know, it's that he says what he thinks to a fault.

To everyone: 

9) CBO's questions were all negative. As LA Fan alluded to, one of the questions should have been, :"Does starting 4 freshmen make it extremely difficult for us to recruit?"  I would say that is as much a factor as any of the questions CBO chose ask.

11) Remember to look at the Hobbs years - when he landed the great Hall/Pops/Omar/Mike class, it was 3 more years before another quality frontcourt player would sign with us (Rob Diggs, who was somewhat under radar anyway).   We landed Damian Hollis only after those guys left - and I would submit he probably doesn't come here if he knew he was playing behind Mike Hall.   

One thing that did work for Hobbs was that he landed that frontcourt one year, then Carl/JR/Lucas backcourt the next.  Then, he still managed to get Maurice Rice, though that was aided by the fact that most schools wouldn't touch him due to his bogus HS. I think it wold be hard to consistently land high quality guards to GW to come in behind freshmen starters. The next high caliber recruit was Noel Wilmore, who probably was enticed by playing time opening up by Ricky Lucas' transfer.   All this isn't an excuse, just to say, it is very tough to recruit to GW wehen we have 4 freshmen who started - though Lonergan's ability to find capable players will ultimately determine this success or failure of his 5 year contract.

12) Everyone has to remember that this messageboard is not the definitive arbiter of everything our coaching staff is doing. I am sure they are working on Plan Bs.  Maybe it will work, maybe not, but at least wait to until the recruit/transfer period is over before turning into Chicken Little.

13) I know our fan base is frustrated.  We have had 6 years of futility after a stretch where we made the NCAAs 8 times in 15 years.  Is there trouble in Camelot?  Sure, maybe.   But every new coaching staff desrves time and support to get their guys and their system in place. Despite Nigel's de-commit, losing one year of Kromah, and even stipulating to Thinker's assertion that Lonergan is gettting a reputation as too harsh, the outside world sees a program that took a big step forward this year and is headed in the right direction.  For now, that is basically correct, and perhaps there will be some good recruiting news before all is said and done this off-season.

So, LA Hoops, why did Kromah and Pellom leave?  And what do you base your information on?  

 I don't know, FQ. Seems like you might need a campaign to keep you busy so you won't be spending a beautiful day outside writing your usual lucid and lengthy insights.

 Great post FQ. And Ziik. Why can't we be patient and pass judgement once the recruiting period is over?

 Gimelstob comparison is very harsh from everything I've heard. Players may  not love ML or his style but nothing I've heard suggests he's even in that stratosphere. Gimelstob was a complete scumbag. 

I will wait until June before making any judgements. Alot of fluidity in recruiting, transfers right now. 

when it comes to this team i'm generally a glass half full guy.  i admit all of the news lately has been negative.  but i agree the biggest hit was from nigel.  losing non ML guys does not really hurt the long term objectives but this year's recruiting experience has been frustrating and disappointing.   nigel was perhaps the worst.  as far as why we lost him i haven't heard anyone mention the timing of nigel's decision with the announcement of all the A-10 defections.  it must have seemed like he was signing on with a conference in the midst of destruction.  that combined with his new found fame may have caused him to bolt.

it may have been bobo who said we are still just 2-3 decent signings from staying on course.    i completely agree with that.

herve, I know that was really a Drivin' And Cryin' reference.

I've read discussion comments below newspaper articles covering BCS teams that burn more recruits and current and former players at the stake in one or two posts than GWhoops posters have in the entire existence of the Internet.   

 It's funny how people's opinions about coaches can change so quick.  Larsen, Garino, Savage, McDonald, and Paris were definitely Loyola/low-major castoffs...we beat out those bottom-dwelling teams like Gonzaga, Marquette, BC, and Virginia.  Like DEA, I'm waiting until June to make any judgements about how this recruiting season went.  Things could take a complete 180 by the time we get there.

the problem is ML was recruiting for only 2 spots. he got Griffin and presumably Nigel. now Nigel reneges and 3 players transfer. so we have 4 slots to fill. i assume ML could not sign more recruits based on the possibility some players might transfer. what was ML to do ask players to wait to see if GW might have more opening? my son what call it a cluster f*ck.

i saw Gimmelstob coach. he was a nut. ML will only be Gimmelstob when John Cheney has his hands around ML's neck.

 Not neccesarily Newtman. Davis and Pellom departures are not a surprise. This has been a horrific recruiting year for the staff so far but I'm not willing to damn them until we see what happens before June. There's still some time to make it right though not much.

I don't think that ML is as bad as Gimelstob. But if ML is 70% LESS harsh than Gimelstob, the players today are 300% MORE sensitive than players back then. So it kind of evens out. To be crystal clear, I have heard from people I trust completely who have talked directly to players and their families who have repeatedly said that that ML's "harshness" was too much for them. I believe that ML is going to have to tone down with the players if he wants to succeed. Lots of coaches are "harsh." But when it's not fun to play (the flex) then it's hard to accept that harshness.

Dealing with the AAU guys is a problem for any program that wants to succeed. There's only a very limited number of quality players who aren't pretty deeply involved in AAU. The NYC AAU coaches blackballed Jarvis and the school had to fire him. Hobbs would 100% have known how to recruit the top players from the top AAU programs because he would have learned that while at UCONN - And that's called cheating - which he couldn't really do at GW. I don't believe that Hobbs ever got a player from DC Assault and Lasan was his only recruit from Takeover. McDonald and Savage were Takeover too. Look at the recruiting targets of GW and its a roster of mostly Takeover, DC Assault and then Montrose Christian. Nigel, BTW is DC Assault. Montrose kids are often not big into AAU - but Kevin Sutton is totally hooked in there

You can recruit kids from California, and if they are unhappy and leave - that doesn't hurt you as much. Local recruits are a different matter. If Lasan left as an unhappy camper and if Savage was an unhappy camper much of the year -- guess what?  It's going to be VERY hard to recruit more kids from Takeover. Whatever anybody thinks about the way the world should be - that's the way the world is.

So ML  can focus on a lot of details; he can be a perfectionist; he can really coach in a "harsh" way because he feels that gets the best out of his players. But I don't think that it actually did get the best out of the team the last two years and I think his rep is hurting him in recruiting.

 For those newer fans who did not know, Gimelstob was an assistant for Bobby Knight and tried to model himself after his former boss.  He brought in some very good recruits to GW (Mike Brown, Troy Webster, Darryl Webster, Mike O'Reilly, Chester Wood, etc).    Many good things happened under Gimelstobs watch...crowds were large, expectations were high, and the team was good.  However, he never lived up to expectations and we crashed and burned rather quickly.  

Dang LSF - aren't you forgetting Oscar?

 My bad...Oscar Wilmington was another good Gimelstob recruit

 @Thinker: Are these 'people you trust' referring to unhappiness from Armwood or the freshman? If not, it's no surprise and a non issue (they're not his guys). You seem to be consistently painting a picture of unrest within the team yet you only reference Hobbs players - no one expects them to love Lonergan, they didn't come to GW for him. It's natural for them to dislike the change.

 Of course, after Gimelstob was fired, we hired nice guy John Kuester, who very quickly turned us into a 1-27 team.  Which leads to the philosophical question as to who you would rather coach the team...a son of a bitch who brings players and some success or the nice guy who made us the laughing stock of the country.  Just as an aside, and I know I have mentioned this in the past. but I miss maybe 1 home game every 5-10 years or so.  Of course the one I missed during the 1-27 season was the Umass game.  What that means is I went about 2 years without seeing a GW win.  As another side, Keuster's last recruiting class included Dirrk Surles and Sonni Holland, 2 significant players on the sweet 16 team.

I like how DEA rips someone for being harsh then calls Gimelstob a "scumbag." Well played, sir.

CPOTS,

It has been referenced elsewhere that Savage has been unhappy and it has been referenced elsewhere that Paris was unhappy at least at one point

And it's fine if you're ok that Lasan, Dwayne, Pellom and Mikic are unhappy. It's just that ML didn't necessarily want all of these guys to leave - so their being unhappy wasn't a good thing.

THis can't be healthy activity. This whole thread had me on the edge of my seat! What? do we have a clue? No? Let's just relax and see what happens.... I give this a double WOW 

DEA how do you recruit players when there are guys who could come back like Pellom, Kromah and even Davis.  ML officially had 2 spots to fill so i don't understand how ML can sign 3, 4 or 5 players. that makes no sense to me and sends a strange message to the players. guess what guys some of you will not be back next season. i did not say you could not continue to have comtact with players but i don't see how ML gets a commitment from recruits before the transfers are announced. presumably ML did keep in touch anticipating transfers. let's see what ML comes up with.

LSF Gimmelstob was a terrible representative for GW. sometimes we forget GW is supposed to be a university first.

Thinker can posit any theory he likes about the state of GWU basketball; but not an inaccurate history. Oscar was a Bob Tallent find: his awsome dunk against the Bonnies caused Bob to yank him, momentarily. GG would have strangled the guy at midcourt. I saw GG throw himself into a fit at a bus stop, because the bus was late. He was a walking inferno. And, he drove Oscar away. He could recruit his ass off, but John Cheney had the right idea.

Newtman,

ML has always known that he would have at least 3 spots -

Bynes, Smith, and Davis (yes - I think ML understood that Davis would leave for a long time). I think that ML also expected Pellom to leave pretty early in the season. So I think he understood for a long time that he would almost certainly have 4 spots. I don't think that he expected Lasan to leave. Apparently I'm the only one that thought that. I don't know whether he expected Mikic to leave - and we don't know that he will - even though I think it's likely that he will leave.

And we know that ML got committments from two guards early (Griffin and Johnson) and continued to recruit more guards and a bunch of small forwards. So I think that ML has recruited as if he would have a bunch of spots, he just hasn't landed players (yet).

Just adding to the last post - All Fall and into January, it was expected that Pellom would return from his injury and surgery and play. So all along ML would have been expecting Pellom to not be back next year. So he would have always expected to need at least 4 recruits.

As Nike and Tiger say, winning cures everything. 

Ultra athletic players may not like the "flex" (as Thinker points out 7 times a day) or any other motion type half court offense, but if Lonergan can win, they will come.  Just look at the offense Beline ran at Richmond or WVU.  Often borring and overly regulated.  But when he had the right players, it worked.  When he got better players, they were able to deviate more and run much more. Lonergan's Vermont teams run motion/flex but ran more.  Blakely for them was very athletic and they highlighted him and gave him tons of good shots and open lanes to the basket.  When ML and staff get more players in their system, he'll likely open up the offense here like he did at Vermont and run more.  Last year, McDonald and Co. could barely get the ball upcourt without turning it over when they weren't trying to run the break. Hopefully next year will be different.  McDonald can work on his handle in the off-season and GW really does need to sign another ball handler.  More use of Savage would also help.

GW has been and will likely always be the land of mis-fit toys for recruits.  If they are very athletic, they likely have little basketball skills (Pellom, Ware, Pops - when he arrived).  Sometimes they get guys with skills but little athleticism (Mikic). Players with both get lots of high major offers.  Sometimes GW gets a Mike Hall, Mike King but they are the exception.

If Lonergan can win, he'll find good recruits for his system.  Garino is a perfect fit as is Larsen.  Actually, Mike Hall would do great in the motion offense becuase he can do all the things it's looking for:  shoot, dribble and pass.  Players with those skills always do well in that motion type of system.  Being more athletic is just a bonus, especially on defense.  Thats why Georgetown, Gonzaga, Michigan and many other teams in the country can still land good players in motion offense that Thinker hates so much.  Because it does fit certain players skill level and player will go to those programs because they are winning programs.  Decent (but not elite) athletes that have some skill level is the type of recruit not going to the Big 10 but can work at GW under the right system.

Same with Lonergan's harshness and attention to detail. It will rub some people the wrong way.  That was the one criticism that the Vermont fans warned us of when GW hired him away. They were still sad to see him go because he consistently produced teams that played consistently well.  So I do think "thinker" has a point there.  Lonergan will have to produce a winning team over in his first 4-5 years at GW or the recruits won't come and it will become a downward spiral.  Right now I'm betting on Lonergan and staff.

 He is not going to get five years here.I would say he needs to get the team over 500 by next season or his seat will be warm and the season after that is make or break. At least from my ticket paying perspective. 

Look at it this way. Hobbs didn't get five years to turn it around and he was coming off of 3 straight tournaments and an undefeated A10 season. 

I don't care about Beline or any other coach you can come up with. I care about the fact that we currently ahve nine players on the roster and its April 10th. This isn't Vermont where you can win with one or two good players. You have no shot in the A10 without depth and we have absolutely none. 

 And "bobo" the recruits aren't coming now, unless you know something we don't 

thinker, i agree he probably did know about having transfers. my post it said sign/commit before the players actually transfer.  if you read my post carefully it said presumably ML kept in touch with recruits anticipating transfers. let's wait and see what ML comes up with. so you did NOT address what i was talking about....sign/commit. if ML were as bad as you say ML could star in another remake of Mutiny on the Bounty.   

Lonergan signed a 5 year contract and will get that full time, unless things spiral totally out of control.  Hobbs lost the confidence of the athlectic administration over his last 4 years and there is NO evidence that they are losing confindence in ML and will give him 5 years to show what he can do.  4 full recruiting years and 5 full seasons.  Put that in the vault, Mr. Steven.

First, I'll confirm Ziik's assertion...Oscar was most definitely a Bob Tallent recruit.  And, Gimelstob did run him off the team prior to his senior year.  Second, I knew Gerry pretty well and while he spent most of his day being an a-hole, what many did not know about him is that he had a somewhat devilish sense of humor.  He happened to be a pretty funny guy though this was not obvious to most.  Thinker's comparison of ML to GG is being perceived by those who responded on this board as being incorrect.  The reality is that Thinker is making this comparison from the point of view of the player, not the fan.  Any fan who has heard both of them speak publicly or privately would say that ML is a more likeable and sensible human being.  But Thinker's concern deals with how the players feel about their coach.  Here, I would defer to his judgement.  It's easy to see why Keithan (yanked in and out of games like a yo-yo) and Paris (seeing little playing time) may have been (or are) unhappy.  It's easy to see why Lasan and David would like to move on.  My hope is that players and coaches will agree to sit down and air out their differences.  Lonergan does not strike me as the type of coach who can't be constructively told how to improve.  And that is where he also differs greatly from Gimelstob.