Coaching grades


#1

I realize that we were shooting very poorly from the field the last to games and the coaches don’t shoot the ball, but should we not have adapted to an obvious off night? So far I dont feel like we have been well coached this year. I have many friends who say that PSU hoops has no identity. We want to run, but we really don’t run. So what happens, according to them, is that we do neither well. We dont run, but we dont have a half court offense of any significance.

Any thoughts?

Coaching grade after four games: C-


#2

[quote=“chicago lion, post:1, topic:313”]I realize that we were shooting very poorly from the field the last to games and the coaches don’t shoot the ball, but should we not have adapted to an obvious off night? So far I dont feel like we have been well coached this year. I have many friends who say that PSU hoops has no identity. We want to run, but we really don’t run. So what happens, according to them, is that we do neither well. We dont run, but we dont have a half court offense of any significance.

Any thoughts?

Coaching grade after four games: C-[/quote]

even much of last year we didn’t appear to have a real strategy offensively, but we got by on talent alone.

I don’t think Ed will ever be confused for a great X’s and O’s guy.


#3

Obviously after today’s loss some decisions are going to have to be made.

  1. I like Frazier a lot, but playing the 2-guard is WAY different then being a scoring point guard like Battle was last year. I just don’t think that he is comfortable not having the ball in his hands all the time and it is affecting his shot and game. Battle needs to play the point and only when he needs a break (either on the bench or a trip or two down the court when he just needs to catch his breath) should Frazier be handling the ball. What that means for Frazier, I don’t know, but Battle has to have the ball in his hands.

  2. Does PSU have to goto a Zone defense. The man to man just isn’t cutting it. There is absolutely no inside presence. The difference was so obvious during the UNCW game where that center they had blocked a couple of shots and altered others and you could see it was having an affect. On the PSU side, guys were scoring in the paint with barely a hand in their face. Only way to get some inside presence is to play a zone where Jones is just parked in the middle.

  3. Does PSU have to go to a more press style, helter skelter type team. The half court defense is killing them and if you don’t go zone as above, the only way to change things is to press and press and press and try to take teams out of a traditional half court offense. They have the horses to play that style as they have two very quick point guards, a few small forwards/shooting guards in Babb/Woodyard/Edwards, and in DJ/Brooks/Oliver they have more guys that are comfortable running and playing on the perimeter. They have the depth. I wouldn’t mind PSU going to a 10 or 11 man rotation, playing a press defense where besides Battle and Frazier, guys take 3-4 minute runs at 110% effort and then rotate in other players. Tell guys if somebody gets a clean look inside, foul him because PSU has 50+ fouls to give assuming 10+ guys play.


#4

[quote=“chicago lion, post:1, topic:313”]I realize that we were shooting very poorly from the field the last to games and the coaches don’t shoot the ball, but should we not have adapted to an obvious off night? So far I dont feel like we have been well coached this year. I have many friends who say that PSU hoops has no identity. We want to run, but we really don’t run. So what happens, according to them, is that we do neither well. We dont run, but we dont have a half court offense of any significance.

Any thoughts?

Coaching grade after four games: C-[/quote]

This is pretty terrible, as bad as you could have had things go at this tournament. I don’t know if the coaches can be graded yet. But if you had to give them a grade, it would be F. Penn State has crapped out for 3 straight years in these tournaments. Last year, it basically blew the whole season (an NIT win is nice, but uninteresting), so this really is frustrating to even think about.


#5
[quote="chicago lion, post:1, topic:313"]I realize that we were shooting very poorly from the field the last to games and the coaches don't shoot the ball, but should we not have adapted to an obvious off night? So far I dont feel like we have been well coached this year. I have many friends who say that PSU hoops has no identity. We want to run, but we really don't run. So what happens, according to them, is that we do neither well. We dont run, but we dont have a half court offense of any significance.

Any thoughts?

Coaching grade after four games: C-[/quote]

This is pretty terrible, as bad as you could have had things go at this tournament. I don’t know if the coaches can be graded yet. But if you had to give them a grade, it would be F. Penn State has crapped out for 3 straight years in these tournaments. Last year, it basically blew the whole season (an NIT win is nice, but uninteresting), so this really is frustrating to even think about.

Really? So winning the Charleston Classic is more “important” than winning the NIT? Asinine. >:(

By the way, the team didn’t “crap out” last year at the Old Spice Tournament. That was two seasons ago. Last season, the team lost in the semifinals of the Philly Hoop Group Classic to Rhode Island (a disappointing loss, but not a “crap out”).

FYI, that “uninteresting” win of the NIT is why the interest is spiked this season and probably a good reason why so many are disappointed right about now. Hopes were way to high to start the season and now people are dejected and trying to toss about ridiculous statements like

(an NIT win is nice, but uninteresting).

#6

I didn’t see the game, so maybe I’m wrong here. However, looking at the stats, Tulane shot 17-48 and 8-19 from behind the arc, giving them an eFG% of 44%. A number like that would have been top 10 in the country last year. We also got 23 of the 31 rebounds available at that end of the court. Those numbers really tell me that we did everything that we needed to win at the defensive end.

Looking that other way, we shot 17-55 (4/18 from 3), giving us an eFG% of 35%. That number would be last in the country by a wide margain over a season.

Several years ago, it was our defense that was really costing us games. Yesterday, the defense certainly hurt us. However we still only had an offensive eFG% of 36% yesterday. We’re not going to win many (if any) games when we’re not making shots, and I didn’t see any issues with our looks yesterday (there were certainly games last year where we got a lot fewer good loks yet made more shots).


#7
[quote="Cletus11, post:3, topic:313"]2. Does PSU have to goto a Zone defense. The man to man just isn't cutting it. There is absolutely no inside presence. The difference was so obvious during the UNCW game where that center they had blocked a couple of shots and altered others and you could see it was having an affect. On the PSU side, guys were scoring in the paint with barely a hand in their face. Only way to get some inside presence is to play a zone where Jones is just parked in the middle.[/quote]

I didn’t see the game, so maybe I’m wrong here. However, looking at the stats, Tulane shot 17-48 and 8-19 from behind the arc, giving them an eFG% of 44%. A number like that would have been top 10 in the country last year. We also got 23 of the 31 rebounds available at that end of the court. Those numbers really tell me that we did everything that we needed to win at the defensive end.

Looking that other way, we shot 17-55 (4/18 from 3), giving us an eFG% of 35%. That number would be last in the country by a wide margain over a season.

Several years ago, it was our defense that was really costing us games. Yesterday, the defense certainly hurt us. However we still only had an offensive eFG% of 36% yesterday. We’re not going to win many (if any) games when we’re not making shots, and I didn’t see any issues with our looks yesterday (there were certainly games last year where we got a lot fewer good loks yet made more shots).

Tulane’s offensive numbers were deceiving. Our defense still looked bad. They were just missing shots.


#8

Only thing I’d give the staff a passing grade on is when we apply the press (a B+ prob on that). Both games when we were down and applied it it worked pretty well. It got us back into the games. But that’s the only thing I can think of that we’ve done well down there. Everything else is just plain awful.

EDIT: Also forgot to mention the free throw shooting has been pretty good too down there. Now just put it all together fellas.


#9

I think the coaches have done a great job on recruiting guards(A) and wings(B-)(D’oh, that word) and not such a good job on bigs(C-). But if the bigs are okay, nobody is being taught to play like a big on offense. I’d give them a D on that. I know people say hard to replace Cornley, but does that mean nobody plays like a 4? Sasa, yes, but he’s not playing much, and Brooks today, yes, but a small portion of the game. Somebody who’s on the court has to play the 4 position. It reminds me of 2 years ago, when Claxton and Cornley were out. Nobody played that position and PSU got killed. If this season continues with nobody playing that regularly, they get an F on that. I mean, when your center graduates, do you not play with a center? Or your pg? What’s the difference when a 4 graduates? I don’t care if guys are more comfortable playing facing the basket. Tough.

Someone has to play like this. Buie’s coming next year, and while he’s great, he’s no front line player, so we have to dance with who we brung. Ain’t no help coming in this area. Better learn to do it sooner rather than later.


#10
[quote="chicago lion, post:1, topic:313"]I realize that we were shooting very poorly from the field the last to games and the coaches don't shoot the ball, but should we not have adapted to an obvious off night? So far I dont feel like we have been well coached this year. I have many friends who say that PSU hoops has no identity. We want to run, but we really don't run. So what happens, according to them, is that we do neither well. We dont run, but we dont have a half court offense of any significance.

Any thoughts?

Coaching grade after four games: C-[/quote]

This is pretty terrible, as bad as you could have had things go at this tournament. I don’t know if the coaches can be graded yet. But if you had to give them a grade, it would be F. Penn State has crapped out for 3 straight years in these tournaments. Last year, it basically blew the whole season (an NIT win is nice, but uninteresting), so this really is frustrating to even think about.

Really? So winning the Charleston Classic is more “important” than winning the NIT? Asinine. >:(

By the way, the team didn’t “crap out” last year at the Old Spice Tournament. That was two seasons ago. Last season, the team lost in the semifinals of the Philly Hoop Group Classic to Rhode Island (a disappointing loss, but not a “crap out”).

FYI, that “uninteresting” win of the NIT is why the interest is spiked this season and probably a good reason why so many are disappointed right about now. Hopes were way to high to start the season and now people are dejected and trying to toss about ridiculous statements like

(an NIT win is nice, but uninteresting).

Where did I say that winning the Charleston Classic is more important than the NIT? That is totally misquoting me, or at least misunderstanding me.

Last year - I think they missed the NCAA largely because they failed to win the first game in their Nov. tournament and didn’t get to face Villanova. We were knocked for a bad OOC schedule, and a lot of that was because of the tournament performance. The year before, 3 straight losses in Orlando set the tone for a bad season. When I say the NIT is uninteresting, I mean in terms of getting the program to where we’d all like to see it go. They need to get into the NCAA tournament. Otherwise, the program is still a relative nobody on the national stage. I fear that if DeChellis takes a large step back this year, he may never get the program to where we would all like to see it go. I just don’t know what will be there to convince better recruits to come unless the program makes the tournament soon. These last 2 losses will be “bad losses” at the end of the season. Assuming this team is anywhere near a record worthy of NCAA consideration, they may kill the chances yet again. Consecutive NIT appearances is a very weak standard for success. A first or second round NCAA loss would have been better for this program’s perception than an NIT victory. It doesn’t matter if that’s fair, it’s reality


#11

I realize its extremely early and a lot can change but RPIforecast is currently projecting UNC-Wilmington to finish at 11-16 with a projected final RPI of 229 while Tulane is projected to an 11-16 record with a final RPI of 193. These losses will NOT be good if PSU is in tournament contention. IMHO opinion, PSU would need to win out in OOC play and finish at least .500 in BT play to have a realistic shot.

PS… PSU is currently projected to go 13-15 with a final RPI of 124.


#12
[quote="chicago lion, post:1, topic:313"]I realize that we were shooting very poorly from the field the last to games and the coaches don't shoot the ball, but should we not have adapted to an obvious off night? So far I dont feel like we have been well coached this year. I have many friends who say that PSU hoops has no identity. We want to run, but we really don't run. So what happens, according to them, is that we do neither well. We dont run, but we dont have a half court offense of any significance.

Any thoughts?

Coaching grade after four games: C-[/quote]

This is pretty terrible, as bad as you could have had things go at this tournament. I don’t know if the coaches can be graded yet. But if you had to give them a grade, it would be F. Penn State has crapped out for 3 straight years in these tournaments. Last year, it basically blew the whole season (an NIT win is nice, but uninteresting), so this really is frustrating to even think about.

Really? So winning the Charleston Classic is more “important” than winning the NIT? Asinine. >:(

By the way, the team didn’t “crap out” last year at the Old Spice Tournament. That was two seasons ago. Last season, the team lost in the semifinals of the Philly Hoop Group Classic to Rhode Island (a disappointing loss, but not a “crap out”).

FYI, that “uninteresting” win of the NIT is why the interest is spiked this season and probably a good reason why so many are disappointed right about now. Hopes were way to high to start the season and now people are dejected and trying to toss about ridiculous statements like

(an NIT win is nice, but uninteresting).

Where did I say that winning the Charleston Classic is more important than the NIT? That is totally misquoting me, or at least misunderstanding me.

Last year - I think they missed the NCAA largely because they failed to win the first game in their Nov. tournament and didn’t get to face Villanova. We were knocked for a bad OOC schedule, and a lot of that was because of the tournament performance. The year before, 3 straight losses in Orlando set the tone for a bad season. When I say the NIT is uninteresting, I mean in terms of getting the program to where we’d all like to see it go. They need to get into the NCAA tournament. Otherwise, the program is still a relative nobody on the national stage. I fear that if DeChellis takes a large step back this year, he may never get the program to where we would all like to see it go. I just don’t know what will be there to convince better recruits to come unless the program makes the tournament soon. These last 2 losses will be “bad losses” at the end of the season. Assuming this team is anywhere near a record worthy of NCAA consideration, they may kill the chances yet again. Consecutive NIT appearances is a very weak standard for success. A first or second round NCAA loss would have been better for this program’s perception than an NIT victory. It doesn’t matter if that’s fair, it’s reality

PSU missed the NCAA Tournament just because they failed to play Villanova? That is like blaming the team for losing against Tulane because Cammeron Woodyard missed one 3 pointer. Just like that was just one shot in an entire game worth of shots, last year’s loss to Rhode Island was just one loss in one game in a season’s worth of games. Why not use the loss to Purdue in the Big Ten Tournament as a reason why they missed the NCAA Tournament? Or the loss at Iowa in the last game of the regular season? It is more probable that the Lions missed the NCAA Tournament because they scheduled so many poor teams in their OOC, not because of some perceived misstep that kept them from facing Villanova. The Lions “tournament performance” last year left them 3-1, albeit with wins against teams like NJIT and Towson. Games against New Hampshire, Lafayette, Sacred Heart and Army are what kept the Lions RPI so low, and made their OOC schedule seem like a pathetic joke.

Furthermore, the previous season, was not a “bad season”. The Lions finished the regular season 15-15 with wins against Virginia Tech, Michigan State and Indiana, both of whcih were ranked. If not for a last second shot by Illinois, Penn State finishes .500 for the second season in 3 years under Ed. That season was a preview of what was to come last year, 27 wins and an NIT title. While winning an NIT title may not matter to you, it sets a standard of success in basketball that has been rarely seen in the history of Penn State basketball, and success that has not occurred at Penn State in nearly the last 10 years. Before this team can overcome being a “nobody” on the national stage, they have to overcome being a “nobody” to Penn State fans. Last season’s NIT victory has been instrumental in propelling interest in Lions basketball this season.

While going to the NIT back-to-back would be considered “weak success” for someone like you, it would take the Lions back to the years of success not seen since the mid-90s. It is asinine to expect that Penn State basketball would suddenly burst onto a national stage after having suffered losing season after losing season for so many years. It may not equate with “success” for you, but for many people who visit here, I believe it would equate with success for them.

It is a shame that you can’t overcome your overzealous expectations to applaud last seasons team for winning the NIT and recognize the success that has happened here the last 3 years. :-[


#13

Team just seems “out of whack” overall offensively.
IMO the horrible perimeter shooting is too blame - it’s execution not coaching.


#14

[quote=“Captain Cranky, post:12, topic:313”]Furthermore, the previous season, was not a “bad season”. The Lions finished the regular season 15-15 with wins against Virginia Tech, Michigan State and Indiana, both of whcih were ranked. If not for a last second shot by Illinois, Penn State finishes .500 for the second season in 3 years under Ed. That season was a preview of what was to come last year, 27 wins and an NIT title. While winning an NIT title may not matter to you, it sets a standard of success in basketball that has been rarely seen in the history of Penn State basketball, and success that has not occurred at Penn State in nearly the last 10 years. Before this team can overcome being a “nobody” on the national stage, they have to overcome being a “nobody” to Penn State fans. Last season’s NIT victory has been instrumental in propelling interest in Lions basketball this season.

While going to the NIT back-to-back would be considered “weak success” for someone like you, it would take the Lions back to the years of success not seen since the mid-90s. It is asinine to expect that Penn State basketball would suddenly burst onto a national stage after having suffered losing season after losing season for so many years. [/quote]

  1. 15-15, 7-11, no postseason, is not a very good season. If that is the measure of a good season, I will just stop following the program. It may be good relative to the horrible records PSU Had after 2001, but it is not great

  2. Where is all this great interest in PSU basketball as a result of the NIT victory? PSU was still invited to a tournament that featured South Carolina and Miami (FL), there is still a long way to go before there is serious interest in this program

  3. “years” of success in the mid-90s??? What were those? I remember one year of success, singular

  4. Why is it “asinine” to want the program to emerge onto the national stage suddenly? That’s kind of the way this works. You’re not supposed to take 100 years to get there. 8-10 tops. Texas A&M and Washington State were in as bad of shape as PSU in about 2003-2004. Both have had top 25 teams since, and been on the ‘national stage’ at least once since then. This is not asking a lot

I just believe that a major step backwards this year would be a huge downer for the program. I look at the Big Ten and see many teams in the top 25. Losses to UNCW and Tulane are startling, and I worry about the Big Ten record, as well as games against VT and UVa. You just can’t plod along with a lousy RPI every year in this sport and expect anything to ever change. I’d settle for an NCAA once every 4 years as successful for this program. It is certainly not asking too much, or even very much. Utter incompetence by coaches and ADs over the years put PSU in its position, and I think DeChellis is the best hope to overcome it. But he cannot continue to work small miracles in recruiting without getting to the dance eventually

The difficult thing about building a program is constantly overachieving until you have some real success to go out and recruit with. DeChellis definitely did it last year, but now needs to do it again. There should have been some serious urgency about beating UNCW, and for a stretch in the 2nd half PSU showed that they were a much better team, then they just ran out of time. Shouldn’t have lost that game, I need to give these guys an F so far. They just put themselves in a position where they have to win 9 or 10 in a stacked Big Ten to be on anybody’s radar in March


#15
[quote="Captain Cranky, post:12, topic:313"]Furthermore, the previous season, was not a "bad season". The Lions finished the regular season 15-15 with wins against Virginia Tech, Michigan State and Indiana, both of whcih were ranked. If not for a last second shot by Illinois, Penn State finishes .500 for the second season in 3 years under Ed. That season was a preview of what was to come last year, 27 wins and an NIT title. While winning an NIT title may not matter to you, it sets a standard of success in basketball that has been rarely seen in the history of Penn State basketball, and success that has not occurred at Penn State in nearly the last 10 years. Before this team can overcome being a "nobody" on the national stage, they have to overcome being a "nobody" to Penn State fans. Last season's NIT victory has been instrumental in propelling interest in Lions basketball this season.

While going to the NIT back-to-back would be considered “weak success” for someone like you, it would take the Lions back to the years of success not seen since the mid-90s. It is asinine to expect that Penn State basketball would suddenly burst onto a national stage after having suffered losing season after losing season for so many years.[/quote]

  1. 15-15, 7-11 is not a very good season. If that is the measure of a good season, I will just stop following the program. It may be good relative to the horrible records PSU Had after 2001, but it is not great

  2. Where is all this great interest in PSU basketball as a result of the NIT victory? PSU was still invited to a tournament that featured South Carolina and Miami (FL), there is still a long way to go before there is serious interest in this program

  3. “years” of success in the mid-90s??? What were those? I remember one year of success, singular

  4. Why is it “asinine” to want the program to emerge onto the national stage suddenly? That’s kind of the way this works. You’re not supposed to take 100 years to get there. 8-10 tops. Texas A&M and Washington State were in as bad of shape as PSU in about 2003-2004. Both have had top 25 teams since, and been on the national stage at least once since then. This is not asking a lot

More recently than that, a few years after GaTech bound Paul Hewitt left Siena, they were one of worst teams in country under new coach, ‘04’/05. They couldn’t beat good HS teams. Under new coach, Fran McCaffery, they beat OSU in tourney last year, and were ranked in top 25 pre-season this year. Took him 4 years to make NCAA’s(made it to the second round) and 5 years to be in top 25. And Albany is not a bball draw.


#16

TAMU and Wazzou are not football schools - at least, not good ones. Until PSU is able to shake the idea of being JUST a football school who plays basketball in the winter, there will just not be a huge commitment made to the program.

Ed wasn’t exactly a huge grab for us at head coach - what makes you think they’d go for anybody bigger than he was upon getting the job here, if we were to go another direction in the near future? I see no reason to believe that. On the other hand, if we stick with Ed and he finally starts putting together a perennial contender for the tournament, and a semi-regular top-25 team… then you will start seeing more commitment to the basketball program from the school/alumni/etc…

It’s probably never going to happen the other way around though - people spend most of the time and money with our football team. They don’t necessarily care if the basketball program is all that great, because they in all likelihood aren’t basketball fans - they probably didn’t goto many games while going to school up here, and have no history of having reason to follow the team more than casually.

For those reasons - it seems to me we’ll never be treated like a successful program by our school until we start stringing some success together - year after year. If that makes any sense to anybody… lol.


#17

What does that have to do with anything? What is a “football” school? If it means a school where football is king, I don’t know how you classify Texas A&M as something else. They hired an NFL coach to turn things around

I’m still not sure what this has to do with anything. It is completely irrelevant to success in basketball. It is easier to be successful in basketball anyway.


#18

I agree with your conclusion - we need success to start happening on the court to build success. It’s a chicken and egg problem. I don’t agree with your premise though. If we want to have a good football team and basketball team, well a bunch other schools have figured out how to do that. I don’t think they need anybody other than DeChellis either, or even more of a financial commitment. What they need - is not to drop many games to bad teams like they did on Thurs. and Fri., and they need to overachieve in the B10 like last year


#19

[quote=“psu2006, post:14, topic:313”]1) 15-15, 7-11, no postseason, is not a very good season. If that is the measure of a good season, I will just stop following the program. It may be good relative to the horrible records PSU Had after 2001, but it is not great

[font=Verdana]That’s the point. You have to look at the progress that the team is making, not just the overall result. [/font]

  1. Where is all this great interest in PSU basketball as a result of the NIT victory? PSU was still invited to a tournament that featured South Carolina and Miami (FL), there is still a long way to go before there is serious interest in this program

[font=Verdana]The interest is coming from recruits. The level of interest by high school kids is leaps and bounds beyond what it was a few years ago. [/font]

  1. “years” of success in the mid-90s??? What were those? I remember one year of success, singular

[font=Verdana]Twenty wins in 1990, 1991, 1992, 1995, 1996. A10 champions in 1991. B10 runner-up in 1993. NCAAs in 1991, 1996. NIT in 1990, 1992, 1995, 1998, 2000[/font][/quote]


#20
[quote="Captain Cranky, post:12, topic:313"]Furthermore, the previous season, was not a "bad season". The Lions finished the regular season 15-15 with wins against Virginia Tech, Michigan State and Indiana, both of whcih were ranked. If not for a last second shot by Illinois, Penn State finishes .500 for the second season in 3 years under Ed. That season was a preview of what was to come last year, 27 wins and an NIT title. While winning an NIT title may not matter to you, it sets a standard of success in basketball that has been rarely seen in the history of Penn State basketball, and success that has not occurred at Penn State in nearly the last 10 years. Before this team can overcome being a "nobody" on the national stage, they have to overcome being a "nobody" to Penn State fans. Last season's NIT victory has been instrumental in propelling interest in Lions basketball this season.

While going to the NIT back-to-back would be considered “weak success” for someone like you, it would take the Lions back to the years of success not seen since the mid-90s. It is asinine to expect that Penn State basketball would suddenly burst onto a national stage after having suffered losing season after losing season for so many years.[/quote]

  1. 15-15, 7-11, no postseason, is not a very good season. If that is the measure of a good season, I will just stop following the program.

Then stop following the program. Frankly, I doubt this basketball program needs people like yourself “following” it if you are

a) so quick to have a knee-jerk reaction after the team loses a few games early in this season.
b) willing to label the NIT championship win last season as “uninteresting”.
c) unable to recognize the improvement this program has achieved since DeChellis first arrived here.

[i][b]an NIT win is nice, but uninteresting[/b][/i]
It may be good relative to the horrible records PSU Had after 2001, but it is not great
  1. Where is all this great interest in PSU basketball as a result of the NIT victory? PSU was still invited to a tournament that featured South Carolina and Miami (FL), there is still a long way to go before there is serious interest in this program

  2. “years” of success in the mid-90s??? What were those? I remember one year of success, singular

  3. Why is it “asinine” to want the program to emerge onto the national stage suddenly? That’s kind of the way this works. You’re not supposed to take 100 years to get there. 8-10 tops. Texas A&M and Washington State were in as bad of shape as PSU in about 2003-2004. Both have had top 25 teams since, and been on the ‘national stage’ at least once since then. This is not asking a lot

I just believe that a major step backwards this year would be a huge downer for the program. I look at the Big Ten and see many teams in the top 25. Losses to UNCW and Tulane are startling, and I worry about the Big Ten record, as well as games against VT and UVa. You just can’t plod along with a lousy RPI every year in this sport and expect anything to ever change. I’d settle for an NCAA once every 4 years as successful for this program. It is certainly not asking too much, or even very much. Utter incompetence by coaches and ADs over the years put PSU in its position, and I think DeChellis is the best hope to overcome it. But he cannot continue to work small miracles in recruiting without getting to the dance eventually

The difficult thing about building a program is constantly overachieving until you have some real success to go out and recruit with. DeChellis definitely did it last year, but now needs to do it again. There should have been some serious urgency about beating UNCW, and for a stretch in the 2nd half PSU showed that they were a much better team, then they just ran out of time. Shouldn’t have lost that game, I need to give these guys an F so far. They just put themselves in a position where they have to win 9 or 10 in a stacked Big Ten to be on anybody’s radar in March

and props to UncleLar for pointing out the recent increased interest in recruits and the years of “success” from 1990-2000 that this guy seemed willing to ignore.