This was a Brendan Quinn idea but that program should have just backed a dump truck of cash up to Pitino’s house
Nobody rewarded Turgeon for being basically clean, who cares
3 Likes
Lol got me
1 Like
That’s impossible to say at this time.
1 Like
Wrong Petino!
1 Like
That’s true, but on the other hand, there is no right Pitino
6 Likes
No it’s not. Succeeding at that level requires an elite coach. Any such coach would have established Seton Hall as the second best program in the Big East behind Villanova. Williard could only manage to have Seton Hall as a third tier program in the an inferior conference.
There is no chance Williard will have more success against a much higher level of competition.
1 Like
He was not a third tier program in a bad conference.
He was a second tier program in a mediocre conference!
1 Like
Never said he was.
I did say he had a third tier program in a conference which is inferior to the B1G, which does not mean, or even imply, bad.
Villanova is obviously in a tier of their own. And then Creighton is obviously a tier of above Seton Hall as well.
So which do you disagree with?
Do you think the Big East is better than the B1G?
Or do you think I was giving him too much credit, and Seton Hall was actually a 4th tier Big East program under him?
1 Like
Seton Hall operates at a decent facilities disadvantage compared to many other Big East schools. Factoring that in he was probably a bit underrated when he made the move over to Maryland. But he’s been itching to get out for a while. He was close to taking the Virginia Tech job but (this is me speculating) Myles Powell opting to return kept him at SHU. He and Turgeon both had the same raw deal in 2020 where their best team did not get to play in the tournament.
OTOH he also had two Big East players of the year but never truly “got there.” Even in 2020 with both Powell and Sandro on the roster they went 5-5 at the end of the year. High floor low ceiling seems right. Lots of 8-9 or 7-10 games in Maryland’s future. He had a great recruiting class at SHU in 2014 (#16 according to 247) and got one tournament win out of it. But perhaps with Maryland’s resources he’s able to build something bigger.
It’ll be interesting if he can maintain this level of recruiting if Georgetown brings in somebody competent post-Ewing. He got to operate at Seton Hall in the mid-2010s while Rutgers had Eddie Jordan, St. John’s had Chris Mullin, and UConn was in a fake conference.
Edit: Since 2016 (both had losing seasons in 2015), Creighton is 77-52 in the BE and Seton Hall is 75-53. They’re on the same tier. McDermott beat a 12 and a 13 seed to make a second weekend while Willard got stuck facing underseeded Gonzaga and Wofford in two of his appearances.
3 Likes
I don’t think Creighton is obviously a tier above.
Since Creighton joined the Big East in 2014 they have an average rank on Torvik of 34th, while Seton Hall is 49th.
That’s a clear gap in the programs.
Honestly I should amend my original statement, because the reality is the Big East has no tier two programs. Villanova is clearly two tiers above the next programs.
So we’ll say Nova is tier one, Creighton is a tier above Seton Hall in the third tier, and then Seton Hall is in the 4th tier.
Maryland fans have delusions of grandeur for what their program is and should be. I’m sure they’ll be happy with a coach who, now that he is at a program with better resources, might be able to reach the same level as Creighton lol.
From the 15-16 season forward each team has a total of 75 conference wins. Seem like pretty equal tiers to me.
i’m cracking up outside my classroom because i can tell this discussion of the big east’s relative tiers is going to go on for at least another ten posts. perfect august content
3 Likes
From the 15-16 season onward, average Torvik finish:
Seton Hall: 42.5.
Creighton: 31.14.
It’s a little closer, but a 10+ gap over such a large sample shows that one program is clearly superior to the other.
Williard couldn’t even manage to have consecutive seasons with a top 50 team one time in 12 years lol.
1 Like
You should probably compare their efficiency margins and not their ranks though
Average ranking is not a great metric to use. The middle has a large number of teams grouped together without much to separate them. The difference between 5 and 35 is much more meaningful than the difference between 100 and 160, but using the average gives the opposite conclusion.
1 Like