Does Chambers get his walking papers or....
- Thread starter rokar
- Start date
There's what some want and there's reality. I get why some want Chambers to be fired now. He's lost a lot of games overall, and in Year 2 with his most talented class, he only got to the NIT. The ncaa tournament was definitely in reach this year. The losses to Rider, Wisconsin, and Minnesota really hurt. There were other winnable games down the stretch, must-wins, where they came up short. It isn't good enough. (I get that they lost Watkins down the stretch, but they lost some key games with him. Also, the season "falling apart" because of one injury points to a fragile state of the program, which is disappointing given how long Chambers has been here.)
Looking to the future, there is cause for concern. Will Carr return next year? If he doesn't, how good can they really be? There are some stiffs on the roster, especially on the offensive side of the floor. How big an impact can Dread make as a freshman?
Others have been critical of the recruiting after Carr, Watkins, and Stevens. Dread looks like a player, but it does seem as though the talent level has fallen off since bringing in the Big 3. Why is that? How can folks not be concerned about the future?
For all of the reasons above, I don't think Chambers is the guy. I like him as a person, but I don't like the track record, and I don't like the picture moving forward. However, there is no way Sandy fires him after this season. The fact is, while only making the NIT, this has been the high-water mark of his tenure. I just can't see her firing him now. It will be interesting to see if she grants him a contract extension.
Looking to the future, there is cause for concern. Will Carr return next year? If he doesn't, how good can they really be? There are some stiffs on the roster, especially on the offensive side of the floor. How big an impact can Dread make as a freshman?
Others have been critical of the recruiting after Carr, Watkins, and Stevens. Dread looks like a player, but it does seem as though the talent level has fallen off since bringing in the Big 3. Why is that? How can folks not be concerned about the future?
For all of the reasons above, I don't think Chambers is the guy. I like him as a person, but I don't like the track record, and I don't like the picture moving forward. However, there is no way Sandy fires him after this season. The fact is, while only making the NIT, this has been the high-water mark of his tenure. I just can't see her firing him now. It will be interesting to see if she grants him a contract extension.
This thread was a tough read...
It's about trajectory. The program is moving the right direction annually. If there are consecutive years moving backwards, then I would agree, but so long as we're making progress, allow him to build.
Nice straw man. Nobody has argued how great Chambers is such that other programs would be banging down the door for him. We've just argued that the program is moving the right direction, so let him continue to build it.
I didn't even include every quote, but an awful lot of people taking shots at the recruiting. The reality is that the only reason we were able to land the class we did in 2016 was playing time. It also took Pat doing a tremendous job building those relationships early (and bringing in Bostick), but without being able to offer starting positions immediately, we don't land that class. And therein lies the reason we haven't seen a repeat of the 2016 class in 2017 or 2018, nor will we in 2019. When a program has bad facilities, no recent success, and no tradition, it takes a miracle to land high end talent even when you have starting positions to offer. When you have no starting positions to offer, it's just impossible. A top 100 player isn't coming to Penn State to ride the bench for 2-3 years.
So nobody should have expected to see a class like 2016 again while the team featured a starting lineup of 3 freshmen and a sophomore. What Chambers needed to do during those subsequent years is recruit for role players to support that 2016 class. Wheeler and Harrar look like they'll be good bench role players in the future. Dread and Bolton look to be guys who will be good role players immediately and starters later. That is all that could reasonably have been expected. So the only "drop off" that occurred was one that was completely inevitable. We have no chance of seeing a class like that again until the current young group moves on.
How could a season with a team led by sophomores be viewed as the ceiling?
It's about trajectory. The program is moving the right direction annually. If there are consecutive years moving backwards, then I would agree, but so long as we're making progress, allow him to build.
Nice straw man. Nobody has argued how great Chambers is such that other programs would be banging down the door for him. We've just argued that the program is moving the right direction, so let him continue to build it.
I didn't even include every quote, but an awful lot of people taking shots at the recruiting. The reality is that the only reason we were able to land the class we did in 2016 was playing time. It also took Pat doing a tremendous job building those relationships early (and bringing in Bostick), but without being able to offer starting positions immediately, we don't land that class. And therein lies the reason we haven't seen a repeat of the 2016 class in 2017 or 2018, nor will we in 2019. When a program has bad facilities, no recent success, and no tradition, it takes a miracle to land high end talent even when you have starting positions to offer. When you have no starting positions to offer, it's just impossible. A top 100 player isn't coming to Penn State to ride the bench for 2-3 years.
So nobody should have expected to see a class like 2016 again while the team featured a starting lineup of 3 freshmen and a sophomore. What Chambers needed to do during those subsequent years is recruit for role players to support that 2016 class. Wheeler and Harrar look like they'll be good bench role players in the future. Dread and Bolton look to be guys who will be good role players immediately and starters later. That is all that could reasonably have been expected. So the only "drop off" that occurred was one that was completely inevitable. We have no chance of seeing a class like that again until the current young group moves on.
How could a season with a team led by sophomores be viewed as the ceiling?
While I agree that the program is moving in the right direction, the opportunity cost of crawling is high. At the end of the day, I'd be fine if Chambers were extended because: a) he's a good guy and has represented the University well; and b) I have no confidence that Annie can find a better replacement. Neither are good reasons.
I would agree that years 1-5 were crawling (in large part due to reasons outside Pat's control), but I'd argue that beginning with the recruiting in season 5 through today we've seen a much sharper upward trajectory. I agree with the two reasons you cite for keeping Pat, and that neither are good. However, I also support keeping him because the trajectory is no longer just moving from "very bad" to "bad," but to putting us on the bubble and playing meaningful games in March despite being led by underclassmen.
If Carr leaves do they have anyone that can replace his scoring? If not, then I dont see any bids coming soon.
Their climbing up the trajectory ladder because of one top 25 class, whose best player may or may not stay after this season. They still haven't made a tournament.
If it happens, will that be the excuse next year? For better or worse, players leaving early, players transferring, and players flunking out is part of the territory. Coaches need to navigate those shoals.
If it happens he has a real challenge next year. Even if Carr leaves Watkins, Reaves and Stevens return which doesn’t give him an out on getting a bid. He needs to make the tournament next year
Players leaving early for the NBA will certainly be a change for our program. And maybe it means we don't take the next step to the NCAAs next year. I think if Carr leaves, NIT is the floor expectation with NCAA the expectation the following year, along with a couple significant recruiting successes as playing time becomes more available to show that the improvement will be sustained.
Yes. He needed to make it this year. All things considered, the decision should be bring him back, conditional on this team staying together. But the ice is about as thin as it gets. If we suffer a major transfer, even mid-summer, it’s not obvious whether to go into next year with Pat or not.
NIT next year = clean house. No way around it. They need to be a tournament team in 2019 AND 2020.
If PSU doesn't make the NCAA next year Chambers should be gone. Actually, they should consider canning him if this year's team doesn't make it to MSG.
Don't hold your breath. NCAA is doing nothing until the Federal case runs its course and that is going to take quite a bit of time. So far, all the NCAA has done is clear any player whose team has requested it.
I know it's been mostly addressed but ... it really is pretty hilarious to read people say that we've had one good recruiting class in the last 4 years. Actually we've had one relatively bad recruiting class and there was a pretty valid reason that it happened.
2015 - Reaves, Watkins
2016 - Carr, Stevens
2017 - Wheeler ( I guess it's the only bad class we've had but he's become a player)
2018 - Dread, Bolton
Not sure why people think recruiting is going to suddenly just fall off a cliff after this year or next lol
2015 - Reaves, Watkins
2016 - Carr, Stevens
2017 - Wheeler ( I guess it's the only bad class we've had but he's become a player)
2018 - Dread, Bolton
Not sure why people think recruiting is going to suddenly just fall off a cliff after this year or next lol
Must be comical to every so often expect more than less. I wanna work where you do. Come to think of it, nah.
So, you're saying we can't beat a non-NCAA team on the road? High praise from these kids and this staff
Dread and Bolton are top recruits? In what world are you living in? If Carr leaves where does the scoring come from?
Compared to his game coaching, his recruiting looks great. That's the problem.
Chambers would make a good top assistant, and recruiting coordinator. This year's team lost 4+ games they should have won because he is a below average coach. His in game coaching is at a high school level. I'm sure some here will come running with excuses, that he could not win when Reeves was out due to academics. Hello, that is his responsibility as well.....
Yep, all this High Level recruiting that has been expounded upon in this thread should be able to overcome the loss of Carr, if he leaves for the NBA. Other teams, NCAA tournament teams that have not had top 50 classes, get back in the tournament after losing a key player.
Really, Watkins, Reeves, and Stevens are still young (common excuse on this board), and they should be better next year such that they can take up the scoring slack. Same with Bostic and Wheeler, and with the rest of the 2017 class. And with Dread and Bolton supposedly players that can come in and play as true freshmen there should not be any excuses for failure to make the NCAA in 2018. But there will be.........
Who are these P5 teams with recruiting classes outside the top 50 who make the NCAA tournament despite losing a key player? Notre Dame recruits really well and couldn't overcome losing Colson for a stretch.
It's about being realistic about your situation. Notre Dame is a top 25 team if Colson had stayed healthy. We're down 1 of our 2 most important players (if the situation were reversed and they were without Colson and we were healthy, beating them would be the reasonable expectation). I guarantee your place of employment doesn't set unrealistic goals to motivate employees or the company would fail. Presumably, they set challenging goals that are achievable.
Chambers took over K-Mart. The hope after 7 years would be that its a profitable company and no longer on the cusp of bankruptcy, not that it's putting up Walmart numbers.
Who cares if they don't make MSG? It's the NIT, it's a single elimination tournament, don't make decisions that can significantly alter the future just because of a loss in one game. You want to know teams that have done that recently, Pitt did that with Dixon and look where they are. Success or failure in a single elimination tournament is not a proper barometer.
NC State, Wisconsin, Rider, Minnesota, Northwestern. Didn't PSU have a big lead against Indiana?, that somehow slipped away......
Are you blaming Pat for bad coaching in the Rider or Wisconsin games if Lamar Stevens makes his free throws or Tony hits the shot at the end of the game?
Do Butler and TCU recruit consistent top 50 classes?
How about Nevada or Davidson?
Even Gonzaga rarely has a top 50 class.
Dayton was getting to the NCAA with less than top 50 classes, before Miller left for IU.
Every team that has NBA worthy players loses some before their eligibility expires.
If Chambers can't make the tournament with the talent he recruits, he could go out and get better talent. Oh, wait. It's as good as he can do. Yep. The expectation is the NCAA. If he can't get there in 7 years PSU should get a coach that can. Recruiting, player development, game management and strategy, roster management - it's all the head coaches responsibility and the the standard is getting to the NCAA.
Should it come down to having to make every free throw, or hitting big shots to end the game, in order to beat those sorry teams?
No.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
FB Recruiting Levenson's Takeaways: Star power on display at Rivals Camp Series in Dallas- Latest: Marshall Levenson
-
-
-
