Recruiting Update

[John]

We said months ago, that this was the year he MUST recruit at a very high level.    No more mulligans.   No more excuses.   His job was to recruit a stellar class.    Did he?

Of course, you can't tell how good the recruits are until they've started to play. At the conclusion of the signing period, one can only determine how highly hyped the recruits were. Takes real play to separate the studs from the duds.

Based on what we know, it seems to be a class long on potential. Mandell Thomas averaged 27 ppg as a High School senior. Although he apparently had no other scholarship offers when he signed for us (E. Kentucky and Hofstra were looking), he did seem to lift his game against some tough prep competition after he signed.

Travion Leonard is a bit of a mystery. A 6-8, 275 lb widebody, he was being looked at by UNC-Wilmington, East Carolina, and VCU. Since signing, he seems to have taken his conditioning more seriously. A project, like most bigs. My concern is that his HS was a small private school, so I'm not clear on the competition he's seen.

With Jermaine Myers, it came down to Fordham and Western Kentucky. Vermont and Valparaiso were also involved. But he's got good preparation, he's a pure PG, and he's probably the most ready to play right away.

So far, it's a class that has me on . . . oh, Cloud 5. The players in the fold all seem to have significant upside which, if realized, could make this a very good class, especially if we can get a serviceable big in the fold.

[85]

Agreed John.  Im the biggest advocate of the wait and see approach with recruits..too much hype and also too many knocks on too many players whom we have never seen play.

However, Im really schocked we have not been in the mix or really even close with any big name players. Probably the kid in Buffalo is the best recruit we have had, and thats just recruit, not signee.

The A-10 is a major conference. We are not an "under-the-radar" confernce, we are a conference that is blipping all over the screen on radar.  We are about half way through the Pecora 5 years and so far, a big dud.   

[LXRF]

Of course, getting a player highly recruited by other schools frequently has very good results. And every fan seems to key on that kind of player.  What a really good coach can do is visualize how other players, not as highly recruited or well-known, can all play together so that the sum of the team is greater than its players.  I think some point guards, in particular, such as Jeremy Lin and, Yes, Steve Nash, are frequently less known quantities, except to those exceptional basketball minds. 
Highly recruited players come with a big price tag, and usually bigger ego to boot.  From where FU is now, its probably better to recruit very good players who can superbly compliment each other than a bunch of highly recruited palyers that play principally for their career.

[Rich93]

I asked someone (non-Fordham) who knows infinitely more than I do about recruiting to grade our current class by A-10 standards.

Myers, Thomas, Leonard: B
Add Agbeko or a comparable player: A-

I asked:
What would make it an A?
Answer: A pure and prolific three point shooter

Ram71, and I think his source, is tough when grading recruits so maybe we are underrating our current 3 players.  Even without adding one more player, we have an above average A-10 recruiting class according to whoever Ram71 is talking to and have a chance to bump it to an A-.  Seems pretty good to me, but none of this matters unless we win games on the court. 

I am not big on grading recruiting classes but if that is going to happen then I thought it was important to quote a post from a guy who is tough on this issue and seems to think we have 3 good players sigend and shot elevate this class even futher.   

[John]

The A-10 is a major conference. We are not an "under-the-radar" confernce, we are a conference that is blipping all over the screen on radar.  We are about half way through the Pecora 5 years and so far, a big dud.   

The A-10 is not "under the radar", but it does live "in the shadows" of several major conferences -- the Big East, and to a more regional extent, the Big 10 and the ACC.  These are glamour conferences, with recruiting tools far beyond any the A-10 has yet to develop. I was in Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin last week -- some of these places have "Big Ten Stores" in the airports, and the team colors (black and gold in Iowa for the U., red and gold for Iowa State, and red and white in Wisconsin for Whisky) are worn ubiquitiously throughout the state. If an A-10 school tussles against a school from one of those conferences for a player, my guess is the A-10 school's chance of winning might be, at best, 3 times out of 10 (if Xavier, Dayton or Temple is concerned) and, at worst, 1 time out of 30 (Fordham, LaSalle, Bonas, etc.)

So I think in the A-10, we really can't build a program by recruiting some of the fancy "one and done" talents the major conferences get. Rather, our best teams are going to be upperclass-dominated programs with talented and complementary players. It's more a matter of building a program over the long haul than vaulting to the top with a single flashy recruiting class. Given that paradigm, I think Pecora's recruiting to date's been along the correct lines. He's recruiting the best talents who will sign. While this has led to a surfeit of guards, that's to be expected, since guards are more plentiful than quality bigs.

If we get VCU, George Mason and Bradley in the conference -- three teams with recent Final Four appearances --  we might be able to start matching some of the glamour conferences and increase our chances of signing the best talent. [Fordham, of course, having some work to do on the facilities issue].

[rambacker]

If we get VCU, George Mason and Bradley in the conference -- three teams with recent Final Four appearances --  we might be able to start matching some of the glamour conferences and increase our chances of signing the best talent. [Fordham, of course, having some work to do on the facilities issue].

Well put, John.  I think you mean Butler instead of Bradley as a new member in the A-10.

[85]

So I think in the A-10, we really can't build a program by recruiting some of the fancy "one and done" talents the major conferences get. Rather, our best teams are going to be upperclass-dominated programs with talented and complementary players. It's more a matter of building a program over the long haul than vaulting to the top with a single flashy recruiting class. Given that paradigm, I think Pecora's recruiting to date's been along the correct lines. He's recruiting the best talents who will sign. While this has led to a surfeit of guards, that's to be expected, since guards are more plentiful than quality bigs.

 

I disagree.  I dont see how one can conclude that he is recruiting the best talents who will sign. There have been mid majors out-recruiting us. I think there is a bigger pool out there in between the high risk flashy players and the guys that we have signed.  You cant expect me to believe that signing Jared Fay was a good idea or a good use of a scholie. Ditto for Hage's year. Lamount Samuell was not a good signing and neither was Luka to this point. Dominique has been so so and gets cut slack for the shoulder. Better players have been signed by lower conference teams. Its not as simple as high end flashy guys and then the guys we are getting the solid 4 year guys, that's over simplifying things. Plus, we are losing Samuell, and we are possibly losing another player so that tends to eviscerate the whole build with 4 year players thing. If you keep recruiting mostly guards and have 8-9 guards on your roster, you are inevitably going to have high turnover. So 4 year players are never going to happen.

[El Jefe]

If you keep recruiting mostly guards and have 8-9 guards on your roster, you are inevitably going to have high turnover. So 4 year players are never going to happen.

So are you saying that the turnover rate and lack of graduates will eventually cause problems with the NCAA, ala UConn, and that we will be playoff ineligible?   

[ace93]

So are you saying that the turnover rate and lack of graduates will eventually cause problems with the NCAA, ala UConn, and that we will be playoff ineligible?   

If they players are leaving in good standing it's not a problem.  I see what you were getting at there though.

[Vinseiro]

From Zach Braziller NY Post:

Xaverian senior Brian Bernardi will meet with new SMU coach Larry Brown before deciding whether to ask for his release, his father Charlie Bernardi said.

What does this kid have to decide about being released?  He'd have played for Doherty, but not for a HOFer?  He'd get a good education, while playing a very good level of ball.

If anything, Brown will be the one deciding.

[85]

So far since Pecora has arrived he has signed the following players and this is how I would grade them out at this juncture:

Bristol ( A )...............top flight A-10 center, too bad he has to leave
Frazier ( B+ ).............fades down stretch but he has been pretty good overall  
Fatty   ( C ) .............lotta time left to improve
Dominique ( C )..........despite shoulder regressed to virtually no playing time, what gives?
Short ( Inc. )  .......... two (2) injuries
Canty ( Inc. )............work in progress
Smith ( B )................pretty good, 3 years to improve
Luka ( Inc. ) .............tough to figure
Hage ( F )................. waste of 1 year ship
Fay   ( F )..................potential waste of 5 years of ship
Samuell ( D ).............. the mid year curse strikes again! 


I dont think you could grade out any of these guys higher at this juncture.  In fairness, things appear to be improving on the recruiting front but nearly half way through the Pecora era, this is what we have. 

 

[ace93]

I know you feel otherwise, but I think the Hage situation is pointless to discuss/grade. Pecora was not going to look at mid-year transfers, so the scholarship would have sat unused.  Unused or given to Hage, I see no real difference and I much prefer that than to give it to some player who was not A10 level and would have taken it up for more than one season.

[Vinseiro]

85 - agree with your assessment, except think Frazier is a bit too high.

The glaring issue is the lack of a consistent "A" to "B+" guard.

[Rich93]

So far since Pecora has arrived he has signed the following players and this is how I would grade them out at this juncture:

Bristol ( A )...............top flight A-10 center, too bad he has to leave
Frazier ( B+ ).............fades down stretch but he has been pretty good overall  
Fatty   ( C ) .............lotta time left to improve
Dominique ( C )..........despite shoulder regressed to virtually no playing time, what gives?
Short ( Inc. )  .......... two (2) injuries
Canty ( Inc. )............work in progress
Smith ( B )................pretty good, 3 years to improve
Luka ( Inc. ) .............tough to figure
Hage ( F )................. waste of 1 year ship
Fay   ( F )..................potential waste of 5 years of ship
Samuell ( D ).............. the mid year curse strikes again! 


I dont think you could grade out any of these guys higher at this juncture.  In fairness, things appear to be improving on the recruiting front but nearly half way through the Pecora era, this is what we have. 

Pecora did not bring in Hage, he came in with DW and got a ship because one was open and we saved it for this year.  I think to evaluate this correctly, you need to group the players by year.

Year 1 was pretty successful given the timing:

Bristol A
Frazier B+
Dominique C
Samuell D

This could have been a very good class if Dominique had not regressed and played at a B level this year.

Year 2 is the concern:

Smith B
Fatty C
Short Inc.
Canty Inc.
Luka Inc.
Fay Inc.

Even though there are 6 players, there was no real standout in this class.  I think part of that was Short being hurt but Fatty's play really needs to improve if this class is to be considered a success.  If he gets to a B+, Smith to a B+, Short to a B+ and Canty to a B, then the class will be pretty good regardless of what happens with Luka and Fay.  That is a lot of improving that has to happen with all 4 guys, I think it can happen but understand the trepidation. 

[KPW]

If anything, Brown will be the one deciding.

Truth.

[KPW]

Rich93, that is an excellent analysis of the classes to date. Nice job. Objective.

[VTRAM]

Pecora did not bring in Hage, he came in with DW and got a ship because one was open and we saved it for this year.  I think to evaluate this correctly, you need to group the players by year.

Year 1 was pretty successful given the timing:

Bristol A
Frazier B+
Dominique C
Samuell D

This could have been a very good class if Dominique had not regressed and played at a B level this year.

Year 2 is the concern:

Smith B
Fatty C
Short Inc.
Canty Inc.
Luka Inc.
Fay Inc.

Even though there are 6 players, there was no real standout in this class.  I think part of that was Short being hurt but Fatty's play really needs to improve if this class is to be considered a success.  If he gets to a B+, Smith to a B+, Short to a B+ and Canty to a B, then the class will be pretty good regardless of what happens with Luka and Fay.  That is a lot of improving that has to happen with all 4 guys, I think it can happen but understand the trepidation. 

I agree that this is pretty much on point. Agree with Ace that the Hage thing is way overblown (Not long term) and the Fay could be overdone when we get all the facts. Short needs to be the best player in that class and I am still holding out hope that her will be based on the little I saw last year. I see Bryan Smith and Fatty as solid 4 year contributors so there grades will probably both end up in the B range.

Samuell is the guy that I wouldn;t be too hard on Pecora about. He was roster filler that was needed in Year 1 when we had o guard depth at all. He also gave us much needed depth this year. He was recruited over from Day 1 which was mostly likely the staff's plan all along.

[John]

I agree that this is pretty much on point. Agree with Ace that the Hage thing is way overblown (Not long term) and the Fay could be overdone when we get all the facts. Short needs to be the best player in that class and I am still holding out hope that her will be based on the little I saw last year. I see Bryan Smith and Fatty as solid 4 year contributors so there grades will probably both end up in the B range.

Samuell is the guy that I wouldn;t be too hard on Pecora about. He was roster filler that was needed in Year 1 when we had o guard depth at all. He also gave us much needed depth this year. He was recruited over from Day 1 which was mostly likely the staff's plan all along.

Hage was a walkon, not expected to be a game contributor, the scholarship was an "attaboy/thank you". He doesn't deserve a grade of "F" as a recruit, because he wasn't recruited. What he deserves, in most likelihood, is a round of thanks for a lot of unglamorous work in practice.

Fay the Elder can't be judged yet. He held high D-2 offers out of high school, he's had a year to practice with the team. Who knows what he'll bring (although I think he'll be challenged for minutes). Perhaps if he'd done a prep year, he'd have other D-1 offers, but he didn't so we'll never know. My bigger concern was the poor record of Brimmer & May this past year -- I certainly hope Fay the Younger hasn't regressed.

Samuell was ticketed for the NEC before Mike Rice left Robert Morris for Rutgers. He gave us something, and always put on a good effort. Hopefully, he'll get more PT at another program.

[B2Bomber]

Pecora can and SHOULD BE judged on his recruiting and how they turn out.  Its on him.   Its his primary job and the only way to really improve our win loss record and stature.     Its the only justification for his salary.  I am not anti Pecora.   I am not trying to set him up (rhetorically) for a big fall.    I am simply saying its time to pay the piper.   Either he is doing his job or he isnt.    

If he recruits well and we move up the ladder of respectability noticeably and consistently, then he deserves to remain our coach.   If he doesn't, then we all know what that means.

Injuries happen.   But its the coach's job to recruit talent and the right chemistry to the team.

As for the incoming class, I am open minded and just curious about how they are viewed by people, both anecdotally and in the ranks of professional talent scouts.    

I'm not even a 20 win delusional.    I simply want to be a .500 squad or better.    15-12 would make me happy.   And build from there.     But he must produce and produce NOW.

   

[B2Bomber]

Agreed John.  Im the biggest advocate of the wait and see approach with recruits..too much hype and also too many knocks on too many players whom we have never seen play.

However, Im really schocked we have not been in the mix or really even close with any big name players. Probably the kid in Buffalo is the best recruit we have had, and thats just recruit, not signee.

The A-10 is a major conference. We are not an "under-the-radar" confernce, we are a conference that is blipping all over the screen on radar.  We are about half way through the Pecora 5 years and so far, a big dud.   

I tend to agree with you on those sentiments 85.   Again, I am not anti Pecora or whacking him with a 2x4 from behind.   I am simply saying we are Fordham, a member of the A10 and our coach is paid 700k a year.   We SHOULD be involved with name talent and we SHOULD win one or two of those battles.  We won't win them all and we won't win most of them.   But we should win some and that has to come from the coaching staff.    Its what they are paid to do.   Its how teams come from nowhere and appear in the NCAA and run deep.  Its how Bradley and Butler did it.   Its how VCU did it.   Recruiting is brutally tough.....big elbows....smashed foreheads.    But at the end of the day, either the coaches you have produce the talent or they don't.     Period.

[85]

I disagree on the Hage thing. The reason I do is because we burned two (2) scholarships this season with Hage and Fay. Perhaps if it was just one ship this year it could be a wash but two (2) for a last place team in the conference is just not acceptable.  I still think holding it for a possible transfer would have made more sense, we limited our options and with Fay apparently burning another empty ship we were a 3X last place finisher in conference who felt it could play 2 scholie players down. 

The Fay thing is problematic for me and it reminds me of Munson. There is no way that a team in as dire straights us should be willy nilly ( sp ) pissing away a schoalrship like that.  When you get injuries and the occassional academic issue, you are really limiting yourselves by being down 2 guys.  we can't afford to do that.  It is pretty apparent that Fay got a gift redshirt year so he can play wit his brother. And yes I'm speculating because they didn't ask the direct question on WFUV and Pecora has danced around this issue all year. We cannot afford to give away a gift 5th year to a D2 level player so that he can play with his brother, we are a last place team.

Samuell actually didnt play all that badly, but I gave the D to the use of the scholarship as opposed to the player. Maybe I could have been clear on that.



  

[Rich93]

Hage and Fay would concern me more if we did not have enough scholarships to bring in players but we did and still do.  Year 1 we brought in 4 new players, about 25% of the team.  Last year we brought in 5 players not counting Fay.  This year we are bringing 4 new players.  It is not like we did not have enough open ships to remake the team, we will have brought in an entire new squad, 13 players, over 3 years.  If their is a lack of talent, it is not because of a lack of scholarshps to give out because of Hage and Fay, it is because we gave the numerous ships we had available to the wrong guys. 

[VTRAM]

I disagree on the Hage thing. The reason I do is because we burned two (2) scholarships this season with Hage and Fay. Perhaps if it was just one ship this year it could be a wash but two (2) for a last place team in the conference is just not acceptable.  I still think holding it for a possible transfer would have made more sense, we limited our options and with Fay apparently burning another empty ship we were a 3X last place finisher in conference who felt it could play 2 scholie players down. 

The Fay thing is problematic for me and it reminds me of Munson. There is no way that a team in as dire straights us should be willy nilly ( sp ) pissing away a schoalrship like that.  When you get injuries and the occassional academic issue, you are really limiting yourselves by being down 2 guys.  we can't afford to do that.  It is pretty apparent that Fay got a gift redshirt year so he can play wit his brother. And yes I'm speculating because they didn't ask the direct question on WFUV and Pecora has danced around this issue all year. We cannot afford to give away a gift 5th year to a D2 level player so that he can play with his brother, we are a last place team.

Samuell actually didnt play all that badly, but I gave the D to the use of the scholarship as opposed to the player. Maybe I could have been clear on that.



  

Let's see how the Fay situation plays out but I agree it will be interesting.

I guess I understand your take on Samuell but my thought is that Pecora should get an A for Scholarship use bc he found a serviceable player with limited time to recruit that gave us 2 years and provided depth. He was a very borderline A-10 back-up and is now moving on. Did you think he should have had a stud using that scholarship. I think people are underestimating how hard it is to convince player's to come to Fordham right now. We need to to take incremental steps before we land big time recruits.

[85]

Too many other schools have built up quicker than us. Plus, we do have the ability to offer forwards immediate playing time.

Again, if we keep stocking the roster with 8-9 guards, we are going to have guys transferring out all the time. Quite frankly, why on earth would a guard want to sign with a team that already has 8 guards, I just don't see that at all. Pecora hasnt had a big time recruit yet. He stepped up in conference and he needed to step up in recruiting and that has not happened. Not even close.  Dont forget all the the hub ub about re-allocating more expenses for the 'staff" well the staff .  He didnt get a big time recruiter and he needed one.

 

[ace93]

Too many other schools have built up quicker than us. Plus, we do have the ability to offer forwards immediate playing time.

Although we are thin at forward I don't think we have many minutes to offer there. Center maybe, but not forward. Gaston plays about 35 a game.

[John]

Too many other schools have built up quicker than us. Plus, we do have the ability to offer forwards immediate playing time.

Again, if we keep stocking the roster with 8-9 guards, we are going to have guys transferring out all the time. Quite frankly, why on earth would a guard want to sign with a team that already has 8 guards, I just don't see that at all. Pecora hasnt had a big time recruit yet. He stepped up in conference and he needed to step up in recruiting and that has not happened. Not even close.  Dont forget all the the hub ub about re-allocating more expenses for the 'staff" well the staff .  He didnt get a big time recruiter and he needed one.
 

Other schools that have built up more quickly than Fordham don't face our enormous facilities handicap. Kids who have the opportunity to play in an arena with a "big time" feel (e.g., in Temple's or Xavier's 10,000 seat arenas, Dayton's 13,000 seat one) don't want to play in our "quaint", "charming", tiny little "gym".  It is my observation that, among 18-19 year old males, there is little interest in antiquing as an activity.

As for "stepping up" in conference, the fact is that Pecora jumped from the middle of a good conference into the sub-basement of a slightly better and much tougher one. John Calpari would find it hard to lure a "big time recruit" to Rose Hill. If you want Pecora to be able to lure "big time" kids, then you need to solve the "second home" issue quickly, and pony up some money for games at MSG or the Barclay's, far enough in advance, and on a sufficiently consistent basis, that you can promise recruits several showcase home dates a year in a big arena. [No, Izod won't do].

Sounds radical? No, it's what we did 30-40 years ago. Pre-Grank.

[B2Bomber]

Other schools that have built up more quickly than Fordham don't face our enormous facilities handicap. Kids who have the opportunity to play in an arena with a "big time" feel (e.g., in Temple's or Xavier's 10,000 seat arenas, Dayton's 13,000 seat one) don't want to play in our "quaint", "charming", tiny little "gym".  It is my observation that, among 18-19 year old males, there is little interest in antiquing as an activity.

As for "stepping up" in conference, the fact is that Pecora jumped from the middle of a good conference into the sub-basement of a slightly better and much tougher one. John Calpari would find it hard to lure a "big time recruit" to Rose Hill. If you want Pecora to be able to lure "big time" kids, then you need to solve the "second home" issue quickly, and pony up some money for games at MSG or the Barclay's, far enough in advance, and on a sufficiently consistent basis, that you can promise recruits several showcase home dates a year in a big arena. [No, Izod won't do].

Sounds radical? No, it's what we did 30-40 years ago. Pre-Grank.

I am not a fan of the Rose Hill Gym longer term.   But it is what it is.   And in the meantime, Pecora has to ramp up his recruiting efforts and I agree with 85...haven't seen that so far.   

Pecora's whole raison d'etre was recruiting.  Well..."Where's the Beef?"

[85]

Other schools that have built up more quickly than Fordham don't face our enormous facilities handicap. Kids who have the opportunity to play in an arena with a "big time" feel (e.g., in Temple's or Xavier's 10,000 seat arenas, Dayton's 13,000 seat one) don't want to play in our "quaint", "charming", tiny little "gym".  It is my observation that, among 18-19 year old males, there is little interest in antiquing as an activity.

As for "stepping up" in conference, the fact is that Pecora jumped from the middle of a good conference into the sub-basement of a slightly better and much tougher one. John Calpari would find it hard to lure a "big time recruit" to Rose Hill. If you want Pecora to be able to lure "big time" kids, then you need to solve the "second home" issue quickly, and pony up some money for games at MSG or the Barclay's, far enough in advance, and on a sufficiently consistent basis, that you can promise recruits several showcase home dates a year in a big arena. [No, Izod won't do].

Sounds radical? No, it's what we did 30-40 years ago. Pre-Grank.

Im sick of reading this type of apologist posting. Pecora came here for a massive salary. He came here, in his own words, to move from a 1 bid league to a multi bid league. He said that.  So your comments about the conferences do not wash.

Pecora is being out-recruited by mid majors like Iona and Manhattan. He is NOT getting it done with recruiting. We are nearly half way through a 5 year deal and he is routinely going head to head with mid majors for recruits. The "under the radar" crap is old and tired. He did not properly replace Van Macon and that killed us. That was Pecora's fault. That in and of itself is the biggest reason we are behind the 8 ball recruiting wise. The gym, all this mumbo jumbo about second home are nonsense, the guy got played by Mike Rice. Then, he never replaced his top recruiter, despite the fact that he had been allocated the $ to do so. Instead, he elevated Duke ( bad idea ) and hired 2 kids who have done nothing, one who has now bailed on coaching altogether.

The recruiting problems fall squarely at Pecora's feet. He put his faith in Duke and it flopped. In a big way.

The coach himself is not using the gym as an excuse, so its silly for others to do so on his behalf. 

[RamVan]

Im sick of reading this type of apologist posting. Pecora came here for a massive salary. He came here, in his own words, to move from a 1 bid league to a multi bid league. He said that.  So your comments about the conferences do not wash.

Pecora is being out-recruited by mid majors like Iona and Manhattan. He is NOT getting it done with recruiting. We are nearly half way through a 5 year deal and he is routinely going head to head with mid majors for recruits. The "under the radar" crap is old and tired. He did not properly replace Van Macon and that killed us. That was Pecora's fault. That in and of itself is the biggest reason we are behind the 8 ball recruiting wise. The gym, all this mumbo jumbo about second home are nonsense, the guy got played by Mike Rice. Then, he never replaced his top recruiter, despite the fact that he had been allocated the $ to do so. Instead, he elevated Duke ( bad idea ) and hired 2 kids who have done nothing, one who has now bailed on coaching altogether.

The recruiting problems fall squarely at Pecora's feet. He put his faith in Duke and it flopped. In a big way.

The coach himself is not using the gym as an excuse, so its silly for others to do so on his behalf. 

I believe Duke is responsible for getting Myers to come here next season. 

[John]

Im sick of reading this type of apologist posting. Pecora came here for a massive salary. He came here, in his own words, to move from a 1 bid league to a multi bid league. He said that.  So your comments about the conferences do not wash.

Pecora is being out-recruited by mid majors like Iona and Manhattan. He is NOT getting it done with recruiting. We are nearly half way through a 5 year deal and he is routinely going head to head with mid majors for recruits. The "under the radar" crap is old and tired. He did not properly replace Van Macon and that killed us. That was Pecora's fault. That in and of itself is the biggest reason we are behind the 8 ball recruiting wise. The gym, all this mumbo jumbo about second home are nonsense, the guy got played by Mike Rice. Then, he never replaced his top recruiter, despite the fact that he had been allocated the $ to do so. Instead, he elevated Duke ( bad idea ) and hired 2 kids who have done nothing, one who has now bailed on coaching altogether.

The recruiting problems fall squarely at Pecora's feet. He put his faith in Duke and it flopped. In a big way.

The coach himself is not using the gym as an excuse, so its silly for others to do so on his behalf. 

I wasn't apologizing for the coach, merely pointing out an inconvenient truth. We've had 20 losing seasons in the past 21. That's a lot of subpar recruiting classes. There have been two constants to the program in that time: the Rose Hill Gym and Frank. Recruits can ignore Frank if they want, but they've got to play in the gym.

Can you name any other coach in America who has a 3,000 seat gym, and is out-recruiting conference rivals with 10,000 seat arenas -- or even keeping up with them? I can't think of any.

The RHG was a recruiting problem for Penders, for Nick, for The Bad Coach, for DW. As time goes by, and other schools build new facilities or renovate old ones, the RHG just gets comparatively less attractive. And I accept that the old girl isn't likely to be replaced in my lifetime. I'm just saying that if we provide Pecora with a big arena forum for some of his big games, it will help recruiting. I don't think that point's reasonably contestable.

Otherwise, we're just trying the same thing (the RHG) over and over, and expecting a different result. Which, I believe, was Einstein's definition of insanity.