Transfer from WVU -- Pat Forsythe

[GP1]

You were doing pretty good up till the last two sentences.

Thanks for your deep analysis.

[Hilltopper]

Thanks for your deep analysis.

Looked like an appropriate response to me.

[Dave in Green]

If process was easy, more people would get it right. But you're right that a guiding philosophy is also important. It's proper execution of a process that turns philosophy into results.

[GP1]

If process was easy, more people would get it right. But you're right that a guiding philosophy is also important. It's proper execution of a process that turns philosophy into results.

A guiding philosophy isn't just "also important", it is the key to any successful organization. Process is easy because one can read about process in a book. Someone can get a Six Sigma black belt from following the proper process and it takes almost no creativity to get it.

Examples of black belts in college athletics can be athletic directors. These numbskulls who run athletic departments all go to the same seminars and basically all do the same thing because they are "building process" oriented. IMG is a good example of a tool (funny I would use the term tool when writing about a group of tools) all of them use in the "building process". They take all of their former employees with them from school to school so they can have people around them who think like them and will do their process for them. There is little vision involved. Many of them can be described "good" at their jobs. Mack was very good at his job. Process allows someone with minimal talent to be "good". Most good college coaches struggle to go from good to great, not because they can't execute what they learn at all of the clinics; they fail to go from good to great because they don't have a guiding philosophy behind them them that allows their thinking to extend beyond the clinics and those around them who think like they do.

Getting to "great" is more difficult and it requires a guiding philosophy. We have seen greatness at Akron and see it today. Mike Thomas was/is a great AD. Caleb Porter is a great coach. They see outside of the annual athletic directors/coaches conventions and produce great results. I think Terry Bowden has shown himself and will show himself to be a great coach at Akron because of philosophical reasons.

Philosophy...difficult. Process....read about it in a book.

[Dave in Green]

And there are no books on philosophy? I'm reminded that debating which element is more important in a complex equation that requires all elements to be in alignment in order to achieve success is inevitably an excercise in futility.

[GP1]

And there are no books on philosophy?

Sure there are. It all starts with philosophy though. I can't think of a good leader that once said, "I'm going to create a process and then put a philosophy around it."

I think we can all agree John Wooden was one of the great coaches of all time. He used a philosophy to become great. The "process" was just something he used to reinforce his philosophy. If anyone reads his Pyramid of Success, they will see it transcends they normal "building process" that even good coaches use. There is none of the usual tripe we hear from coaches like, "Defense wins championships" or whatever they use to cover up their averageness.

I guess this all brings us around to the Zips. Can we go from good to great with our current philosophy?

[Tom Hagen]

[Zipmeister]

Sure there are. It all starts with philosophy though. I can't think of a good leader that once said, "I'm going to create a process and then put a philosophy around it."

I think we can all agree John Wooden was one of the great coaches of all time. He used a philosophy to become great. The "process" was just something he used to reinforce his philosophy. If anyone reads his Pyramid of Success, they will see it transcends they normal "building process" that even good coaches use. There is none of the usual tripe we hear from coaches like, "Defense wins championships" or whatever they use to cover up their averageness.

I guess this all brings us around to the Zips. Can we go from good to great with our current philosophy?

First, let's get to good.

[Hilltopper]

[Hilltopper]

Sounds like a process to me!

[Dave in Green]

Back on topic with the subject of this thread, I continue to believe that Pat Forsythe's arrival is another sign that the current Zips basketball program is built on both a sound philosophy and process, which will lead to their ultimate goal of winning games in the NCAA tournament.

[Zipmeister]

Back on topic with the subject of this thread, I continue to believe that Pat Forsythe's arrival is another sign that the current Zips basketball program is built on both a sound philosophy and process, which will lead to their ultimate goal of winning games in the NCAA tournament.

I hope you are correct, but it's still a shame that the philosophy forces people to act outside of their comfort zone.

[taxpayer]

Zipmeister - "First, let's get to good."

Seriously?

I think you might be taking KD's program for granted or you are frustrated with the Zips inability to get into the 2nd game of the NCAA's or NIT's. With that said, UA already is "good" by any definition you want to use. Great would be consistent appearances in the NCAA's and trips to the sweet 16's.

It's pretty evident that KD has made a change in his thinking with taking transfer ins (Diggs, Gilliam and Walsh) and Harney and Treadwell with their academic issues prior to enrolling at Akron. All five of these young men represent a significant deviation from KD's initial program designs. Initially, UA/KD couldn't get these type of players since the program wasn't "good". I'd argue he reached good with his initial plan; now he is in the second year of attempting to get beyond good. Let's see what can be accomplished despite a below average facility and a complacent/uninterested student body and town.

[Zipmeister]

Zipmeister - "First, let's get to good."

Seriously?

I think you might be taking KD's program for granted or you are frustrated with the Zips inability to get into the 2nd game of the NCAA's or NIT's. With that said, UA already is "good" by any definition you want to use. Great would be consistent appearances in the NCAA's and trips to the sweet 16's.

It's pretty evident that KD has made a change in his thinking with taking transfer ins (Diggs, Gilliam and Walsh) and Harney and Treadwell with their academic issues prior to enrolling at Akron. All five of these young men represent a significant deviation from KD's initial program designs. Initially, UA/KD couldn't get these type of players since the program wasn't "good". I'd argue he reached good with his initial plan; now he is in the second year of attempting to get beyond good. Let's see what can be accomplished despite a below average facility and a complacent/uninterested student body and town.

The definition of "good" that I want to use is "consistent appearances in the NCAA tourney." Akron is currently above average - on the verge of good.

[taxpayer]

Zipmeister'

The definition of "good" that I want to use is "consistent appearances in the NCAA tourney." Akron is currently above average - on the verge of good.

Thank God I never had you as one of my professors! If KD's program is above average, what are you comparing it to?

Compared to other MAC coaches and universities I'd argue your grading if harsh, if you want to make a comparison to some "majors" then above average applies.

What is your definition of the JAR and the basketball budget? Both of which have a significant impact on recruiting and therefore the level UA's program can attain. My assessment is he is topping out with the JAR and the current budget.

[Zipmeister]

Zipmeister'

The definition of "good" that I want to use is "consistent appearances in the NCAA tourney." Akron is currently above average - on the verge of good.

Thank God I never had you as one of my professors! If KD's program is above average, what are you comparing it to?

Compared to other MAC coaches and universities I'd argue your grading if harsh, if you want to make a comparison to some "majors" then above average applies.

What is your definition of the JAR and the basketball budget? Both of which have a significant impact on recruiting and therefore the level UA's program can attain. My assessment is he is topping out with the JAR and the current budget.

Compared to teams in the MAC, which is composed largely of below average DI teams, we are good. Compared to some majors we are below average. The good news is compared to all DI teams we are above average - on the verge of good.

[Roo]

Compared to teams in the MAC, which is composed largely of below average DI teams, we are good. Compared to some majors we are below average. The good news is compared to all DI teams we are above average - on the verge of good.

I would agree with this. I think a lot of people forget that we play in the MAC and overall just how not so good this conference is. We have a team make a run at it every now and then, but the MAC is about as low as you can go in terms of NCAA competition. Dambrot has been solid in this conference, but we still aren't at the top level of mid-majors. We have a ways to go before we get into the Gonzaga...Dayton...Xavier...Butler's of the world. If we can get some solid transfers and better recruiting classes, we may make it. Most of the MACs tourney runs tend to be aided by a BCS level type transfer.

[Dave in Green]

We all know that there's no perfect rating system, and that one person's "good" is another's "very good." But it's at least worth looking at RPI, because as imperfect as it might be, it's a generally accepted approximate measure of relative team strength and success that relies more on math than feelings.

Last season the MAC's average RPI was only 20th best out of 33 D-I conferences (counting independents as a conference), which equates to 40th percentile. Assuming that 50th percentile is the median or about average (half are better and half are worse), the MAC is definitely below average, but still better than more than a third of D-I conferences.

On the other hand, the Zips finished the season with an RPI of 60 out of 344 D-I teams, which ranks them in the 83rd percentile. Again assuming that 50th percentile is about average, and that the Zips were worse than 59 teams and better than 283, some will say the Zips are above average (or good) and some will say much above average (or very good).

It's also worth noting that while the Zips still trailed teams like Gonzaga and Xavier in last season's final RPI, they were well ahead of Butler and Dayton. What's important now that the Zips have reached this level is to continue improving.

[akronzips71]

In a perfect world, an RPI of 60 would be good enough to guarantee a spot in a 68 team NCAA dance.

When I was at Akron, we were Div II. Now we are in the top 60 teams in the US.

We have come a long way baby. And still have a ways to go.

[scottditzen]

In a perfect world, an RPI of 60 would be good enough to guarantee a spot in a 68 team NCAA dance.

When I was at Akron, we were Div II. Now we are in the top 60 teams in the US.

We have come a long way baby. And still have a ways to go.

Good perspective is always appreciated!

[skip-zip]

@skip-zip, with all due respect to your old coach friend up north, two of the more successful coaches in college basketball history -- Thad Matta and Bob Huggins -- thought enough of Forsythe to offer him, and Huggins ended up signing him. Beyond that, when Huggins got Forsythe down to WVU, he thought enough of what he saw not to redshirt him, but to immediately make him one of the first bigs off the bench as a true freshman.

While there's room for disagreement on any player, I'm leaning toward trusting the judgments of Motta and Huggins over your anonymous old coach friend. But if Forsythe ends up underperforming for the Zips, I'd like to meet your old coach friend up north and get his take on other basketball matters.

Read my post again. I didn't get an opinion about how he'd perform as a MAC player, and I said just that in my post. I was simply just sharing an opinion about the kid that was given to me by a longtime high school coach in the Cleveland area.

[Dr Z]

On the other hand, the Zips finished the season with an RPI of 60 out of 344 D-I teams, which ranks them in the 83rd percentile. Again assuming that 50th percentile is about average, and that the Zips were worse than 59 teams and better than 283, some will say the Zips are above average (or good) and some will say much above average (or very good).

All that got them was a seat on the couch to watch 68 teams play in one of the most exciting tournaments in sports.

Knowing their goals at the beginning of the season, I'm sure the staff, and team would trade those "above average stats" to play in that tournament.

I know most Zips fans would. Stats Shmats, I want to win a game in the tourney now!!! It's time. No excuses.

I'm hoping Pat can help them achieve that goal....sooner rather than later.

[Dave in Green]

Read my post again. I didn't get an opinion about how he'd perform as a MAC player, and I said just that in my post. I was simply just sharing an opinion about the kid that was given to me by a longtime high school coach in the Cleveland area.

I understood your post the first time. You said your old HS coach friend told you that Forsythe was over recruited in HS and didn't belong at a high major school like WVU. When I said I'd be impressed with your coach friend's evaluation if Forsythe underperformed for the Zips, I meant if he underperformed to your coach friend's expectations -- that is, not up to high major performance level.

Again, Huggins not only liked what he saw of Forsythe in HS, he also liked his performance enough against other WVU players that he didn't redshirt him but made him one of the first bigs off the bench as a true freshman. How much weight do you put on your old HS coach friend's evaluation vs. Huggins' evaluation of appropriate talent level for WVU?

[Dave in Green]

@skip-zip, I hope you aren't ignoring my previous question to you because you're taking my question the wrong way. You originally said some positive things about Forsythe, then you shared a more negative opinion from your old HS coach friend. I'm just asking which you're trusting more right now -- your original opinion and the opinions of folks like Thad Matta and Bob Huggins or the opinion of your HS coach friend? I'm still planning to attend a Zips practice when Forsythe joins in (which I understand will be after fall classes start) in order to try to get a better handle on what to believe about his abilities.

[zippyman23]

There does seem to be a double-standard ... IE, Zeigler to Pitt. No doubt if Zeigler tried to go to Akron (or any other MAC school) it would be shot down.

Billy Baron, whose father was fired at Rhode Island, has been granted a waiver to be immediately eligible to play at Cansius. It's time to put this conspiracy theory to rest.