Discussion in 'University of Colorado Recruiting Archive - Basket' started by Quattro, Jul 2, 2013.
CU is a top 3 team already in the Pac 12. These recruits are going to miss out.
Here is how I think recruits see it.
1st Tier: Arizona & UCLA (elite programs)
2nd Tier: CU, Cal, Oregon, Washington
3rd Tier: Stanford, USC, ASU
4th Tier: Utah, Oregon State, Washington State
And that's always in flux. Washington is in danger of dropping down. Stanford could jump up with a tourney season. No one is close to joining the elites yet.
I think the California recruits put USC in that 2nd tier as well. I'd be tempted to swap them and Washington right now. I'd also agree that there's a pretty big gap in perception between Tier 1 and 2 right now.
It seems like the recruits see it as:
Tier 1: UCLA, Zona, Cal, Oregon, Washington
Tier 2: USC, Stanford, CU
Tier 3: everyone else
This is based on the recruits top 10/8/X lists
I think Arizona is in a class by themselves. Know UCLA had a monster class in 2013, but Arizona has consistently great classes. Obviously the UCLA program has more championship success then any other program in the country but almost all of that was Wooden. Dunno if that really matters to recruits now. There's some that it would, but I imagine most want to be in the best position to win and be successful. UCLA is a cut above the other schools in the Conference
I think Colorado can beat out the other teams in the conference for recruits, although they aren't always going to win those battles. I'd say CU is right there with Cal, Oregon, Washington. They will have to battle what the perceived notion of Colorado is from a lot of recruits. If they can get recruits to visit, will have a great chance to win those recruiting battles.
Whether it is fair or not, a lot of people view success based on what you do in the tournament more so then regular season titles. So, a Sweet 16 appearance for Oregon probably helps their program immensely. Regardless, I think the next step for CU is to finish strong in conference play. Hard to be seen as one of the top 2-3 teams if you consistently finish 5th in the conference. Hoping next years team being more experienced, will lead to a better conference record overall and less slip ups at CEC especially.
Finishing at or near the top will put them in a better position to go on a lengthy tournament run (although in a single elimination tournament, anything can happen)
Cal, Oregon and Washington end up on a lot of top 10 lists, but they're rarely serious players for the elite talents. I think there's a pretty clear gap between them and Arizona/UCLA
I would tend to agree on USC and Stanford being on the 2nd tier. Stanford has had a Final Four appearance and an Elite 8 appearance in the last 15 years. I'd put us on the low end of the 2nd tier. Granted we're one of the top programs in the Pac right now and the future looks very bright, but also remember that our basketball history is pretty much non-existent and we haven't even been to a Sweet 16 in over a generation.
yeah I think you are right.
it probably is
Tier 1: Arizona and UCLA
Tier 2: Washington, Cal, Oregon
Tier 3: CU, Stanford, USC
Tier 4: everyone else
When did the Buffs last go to a sweet 16? Wasn't it the same year they went to the Final Four? (1955)
Tier 1: Arizona, UCLA
Tier 2: Cal, Oregon, Washington
Tier 3: ASU, Colorado, Oregon State, Stanford, USC, Utah
Tier 4: Wazzu
Thought process - combination of history/which programs could rebuild the quickest. Honestly, CU was close to tier 2, but we're not there yet IMO. Let's not kid ourselves, if Tad leaves and we make the wrong hire, it's going to be decades before we recover. That keeps us in 3 right now. Stanford is on tier 3 because outside of the Monty years, well, they suck. And the elite talent in the area is going to go to Cal before they go to Stanford. USC should be on tier 2, but they keep screwing it up. Oregon State avoids tier 4 just because they have a decent history.
Something like '68. I'll like it up later and confirm the year.
I think we are confusing "Prestige" with who is "Hot" now. I found the overall winning percentages and total Tournament runs for the entire Pac-12. Here is what I found:
NAME OF SCHOOL: #NATIONAL WINS RANKING, TOTAL WINS/LOSSES (%), NCAA TOURNEY (CHAMP., RUNNER-UP, FINAL FOUR, ELITE EIGHT, SWEET SIXTEEN)
1) UCLA: #8 1753-779 (.692%), (11,2,18,X,X)
2) Utah: #15, 1685-936 (.643%), (1,1,4,6,15)
3) Washington: #16, 1683-1095 (.606%), (X,X,1,2,7)
4) Oregon St.: #20 1654-1251 (.569%), (X,X,2,6,6)
5) Arizona: #22, 1645-900 (.646%), (1,1,4,9,16)
6) Washington State: #42, 1527-1406 (.521%), (X,X,1,1,1)
7) Oregon: #48, 1507-1303 (.536%), (1,X,1,4,5)
8) *USC: 1500-1097 (.578%), (X,X,2,3,4)
9) Cal: 1480-1108 (.572%), (1,1,3,3,4)
10) Stanford: 1407-1055 (.571%), (1,X,2,3,4)
11) Arizona St.: 1214-1092 (.526%), (X,X,X,X,1)
12) Colorado: 1174-1116 (.513%), (X,X,2,4,4)
*USC had wins vacated
Now let's look at the Top - 6 for the last 3 years (yes, since Tad has been the coach)
1) Arizona 80-28 (.74%)
2) Oregon 73-36 (.67%)
3) Colorado 69-36 (.657%)
4) UCLA 67-35 (.656%)
5) Washington 66-38 (.634%)
6) California 63-37 (.63%)
Looking at the overall records and the records from the past 3 years, I am not sure our "Prestige" is as high as anyone else's in the Pac-12, but when it comes to being the "Hot" team now, I don't think that is arguable.
As you say, it's always in flux. Certainly Stanford and USC have ascendancy in them. Not to mention our not so distant past of 4th tier.
Hot now is what seems to matter most. See: Oregon and CU football. History is fond to look back on, but no one seems to give a **** about Utah basketball 1998 right now in a way that helps them in any way, shape or form moving forward.
There's no question that there's always going to be "top tier" programs, in the pac and across the country.
In the pac, those are UCLA (b/c of wooden) and zona. No one in the conference can boast the kind of success they've had YOY. Keep in mind that UCLA was in the final four 3 years in a row (06, 07, 08?) and have only recently fallen into a bit of a rough patch. If you're watching college bball and the tournament, and someone like UCLA/zona is in there just about every year growing up, you're going to think of them as a solid team.
Unfortunately for us, we are hot right now, but that doesnt mean anything if tad leaves. We could be back to the patton days before we know it.
I honestly dont think that ANY AD would let tad go at this point unless the whole team got arrested overnight or something that awful. We are on the way up, but our hold is tenuous, and we need hungry coaches. It'd be nice if CU turned into a Solid program that coaches earned their stripes at (like Xavier) then moved into a huge opening (like Ohio st.)
Brad Stevens to Boston, there goes the Prestige of Butler? Would Tad leave to the NBA?
I don't believe that Tad would leave for the NBA any time soon. There may come a day, but it won;t be prompted by money. It will be because he has achieved all that he wanted to in the College game. Boyle is a very well grounded individual who is in the process of building at CU based on his values and ideas about how to develop an enduring program. I believe that he is committed to see the program manifest and thrive according to his vision.
He also has a family with kids in school right now. That and his ties to Colorado in general will keep him here for a long time.
I believe that Tad Boyle and Phil Jackson have a lot in common. They both are more focused on philosophy and process than outcome ... and they both walk to the beat of their own drum. We are lucky to have Tad and he will be with us for a while.
We'll never have the answer to that
Just out of curiosity what type of coach could CU land if Tad did leave?
I suspect that we'd just promote Coach Pri.
This would be a highly desirable job since the cupboard is stocked, but I don't see CU paying the kind of money it would take to get someone to jump ship from a good HC situation and come here.
Separate names with a comma.