At least they remained in the top 25. We didn't even get a vote.
http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/rankings
Ok state
- Thread starter mystery32
- Start date
At least they remained in the top 25. We didn't even get a vote.
http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/rankings
On some things, you are only wrong by shades. On this, you are completely wrong.
Bob is from a program that is among the most successful in history. The other successful programs have very similar characteristics. His recruiting emphasis approaches a different type of prospect with different backgrounds and motivations. They are basically coming here to train for the pros, and the other programs to which they might go don't offer any particular advantages in that regard. In particular, he has nothing that is a disadvantage.
Indeed, if you look at the history of the OU football program, OU has won a national title seven times in the past 64 years, one in nine. Bob needs another title just to be average.
Consider who you are recruiting. What is the typical gymnastics recruit? Is the gymnastics recruit likely to have a similar background to that of the football or basketball recruit? Every sport has its own targets.
Now, why is it that OU, men and women, not attract top five national recruits that often?
bay, I used to read your stuff. You are so heavily biased in your anti-Sherri rants that I don't even pay attention any more. Too bad. You did make sense.
You can describe it as "anti-Sherri" if you like. Matters not to me. Is she not ultimately responsible for the women's basketball program, or should I write a letter and ask Joe C to do a better job of recruiting and development of student-athletes, along with some better sideline coaching? Better yet, I can write a letter to President Boren about the disappointing season. Really? I don't recommend you read my post unless you're stocked up on Benadryl...the truth tends to have a little sting and everyone can't handle it.
You sit alone and drink and make this stuff up? We played Tenn, and Duke in the last two years. Sherri is a very good coach or she would not be ask to coach the USA team. However, on those teams she has some very good assistants. At OU IMHO not so much.
Has Tennessee been to the Final Four since OU? They had five McDonald's All-Americans this year. Did they make it to the Final Four with all that talent? Duke?
I do happen to have a very good supply of Benedryl, spray and tablet. But, it doesn't change the fact that you are simply overboard on the anti-Sherry nonsense.
atlantasooner
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Messages
- 1,599
- Reaction score
- 11
Syb,
You are completely missing the point.
If Bob who is directing a program with numerous significant recruiting advantages over Sherri, has felt the need to overhaul his coaching staff, and pretty much overhaul every step of the program's recruiting process.
If Bob has done that, then why is it such a heretical comment to suggest that
Sherri might need to do the same thing?
If Bob was burned out with recruiting (and the signs were all there), why is it so treasonous to suggest Sherri might be feeling some of the same burnout issues??
Lon has had to adjust his recruiting since arriving at OU.
Lon pays little to no attention to any top 25 kid. He's not going to chase McDonald's AA. He's not
going to play that AAU cess pool game.
Initially he was relying upon talented Div 1 transfers like M'Baye and Spangler with a mix of JUCO talent.
However, now with more on the court success he's finding that he can sign top 100 type players that will be program anchor pieces like Hield, Cousins, Woodard, Booker and hopefully Buford and Lattin.
Lon will make a deep tourney run soon. He does not need the Harrison twins of the world to get to a final four.
The women's game is different. Talent disparity is so wide.
You have to have elite players to get to the women's final four. You need elite length and athleticism.
Ou has some very talented pieces but the talent at 4/5 isn't there. There's not an all big 12 caliber
PF/C at this point in time on the roster. Kaylon could be. Vionese could be.
SoonerNorm
Super Moderator
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 19,033
- Reaction score
- 1
You are right on the money. Bob obviously realized they were getting passed by some teams OU had not previously had to worry about. He fired some close friends who had been with him since the beginning at OU. I'm sure he hated to fire anyone but he did so believing a change would benefit the program. Would it benefit the program if Sherri did the same? I believe the answer to that is, it would depend on who she hired. If she hired an unproven high school coach, probably not. If she hired one of the top 10 college recruiting assistants in the country, I don't think there is any doubt it would benefit the program. As everyone knows, you have to have a number of elite players to compete with ND and UCONN.
The question is, will Sherri make those kind of changes? I doubt it.
OK. This is better. But, there is still something that evades a reality at OU.
OU can get the best football talent from across the country. The football prospect has different goals and motivation, and the programs competing with OU are not that much different from OU. We have an advantage due to our history and due to the support for the football program at OU.
The male basketball recruit has no reason to choose OU, and we don''t get any of the top ten players nationally, unless they have ties to Oklahoma: Tisdale, Adams, Griffin. Kentucky can get five of the top ten. I don't know if we have ever in our entire history gotten a top ten talent.
Sherri gave us something of an advantage, or did she? As a result of her success and her contact with Erika Arriairan, we were able to get Courtney, which gave us Ashley, Abi, and Amanda---all top recruits. We had three top ten recruits at the same time, but no overall team. All were interior players. It also gave us the contact to get Danielle. If we had been able to turn this into three national titles, it might have solidified our place along side UConn. But, it didn't really measure up to what was needed for a title.
Now, we have an excellent coach. But, why is it that neither the men or women can attract a top ten talent to OU, other than at that one time due to Courtney? We can get close. How close were we to getting Kiah Stokes, Bria Smith, Skylar Diggins, Vicki Baugh, and a few others? We can get our foot in the door, which we can't do with the men. But, we do not attract top basketball talent to OU.
Consider that UConn has won the men's and women's titles now twice in a decade. How do they do that? They have the commitment of the school to their basketball program, just like we do to football. They can't win at football, but they are successful at basketball. Kentucky men are very successful at basketball, but not at football, and I don't think the women have ever made the Final Four.
Rather than being critical of Sherri for not getting the top talent, we might consider the fact that she at least has been able to get it interested in OU. She can get some attention. The men can't. We ARE NOT a basketball school with a program that attracts five of the top ten recruits every year. The question is why? Why can't OU be a basketball school?
atlantasooner
Active member
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2008
- Messages
- 1,599
- Reaction score
- 11
Syb,
Okay you're really engaging in a recruiting discussion.
You have isolated a great point.
Can OU in women's hoops recruit consistent top 20 talent?
Can OU recruit top 50 talent at PF/C (the population pool here
being logically much smaller. And I think the evaluators make
more mistakes with this talent population)
OU was able to do this for a stretch that you identified.
What's changed?
It's one of three things or a combo of all 3
I think that recruiting has changed that previous Sherri pitch
is not enough to get the visits needed/close on recruits.
Social media in particular.
Sherri's burned out on recruiting and after the last final four trip
thought that bump would just land recruits and isn't putting the
same energy and commitment into getting those kids. Settling for
"easier" prospects.
OU's deficits in being a top women's hoops program are making it
impossible to get these recruits consistently.
Principally the quantity/quality state talent pool, mainly providing post talent. (OU football
has the same issue with instate talent at DL/OL)
OU's perceived and in some cases real academic reputation against schools like
UNC, Duke, ND, UT, and Stanford.
Geography which seems irrelevant in men's hoops recruiting, plays a much bigger
role in women's hoops recruiting. Sherri's losing recruiting battles due to distance.
Personally, I think Sherri has to have an elite PG for her teams to really click.
Losing Harden was a huge blow to the program.
Sherri recruited post projects in Jeffcoat & Florida girl. Neither player developed at
OU. And don't appear to be high div 1 players. Crippling post depth/talent.
OU will go as far as Ortiz develops into that PG especially if Little/the Williams/
Manning/Kornet can play up to their recruiting profiles.
Okay you're really engaging in a recruiting discussion.
You have isolated a great point.
Can OU in women's hoops recruit consistent top 20 talent?
Can OU recruit top 50 talent at PF/C (the population pool here
being logically much smaller. And I think the evaluators make
more mistakes with this talent population)
OU was able to do this for a stretch that you identified.
What's changed?
It's one of three things or a combo of all 3
I think that recruiting has changed that previous Sherri pitch
is not enough to get the visits needed/close on recruits.
Social media in particular.
Sherri's burned out on recruiting and after the last final four trip
thought that bump would just land recruits and isn't putting the
same energy and commitment into getting those kids. Settling for
"easier" prospects.
OU's deficits in being a top women's hoops program are making it
impossible to get these recruits consistently.
Principally the quantity/quality state talent pool, mainly providing post talent. (OU football
has the same issue with instate talent at DL/OL)
OU's perceived and in some cases real academic reputation against schools like
UNC, Duke, ND, UT, and Stanford.
Geography which seems irrelevant in men's hoops recruiting, plays a much bigger
role in women's hoops recruiting. Sherri's losing recruiting battles due to distance.
Personally, I think Sherri has to have an elite PG for her teams to really click.
Losing Harden was a huge blow to the program.
Sherri recruited post projects in Jeffcoat & Florida girl. Neither player developed at
OU. And don't appear to be high div 1 players. Crippling post depth/talent.
OU will go as far as Ortiz develops into that PG especially if Little/the Williams/
Manning/Kornet can play up to their recruiting profiles.
SoonerNorm
Super Moderator
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 19,033
- Reaction score
- 1
OU was not known as a softball school until Patty Gasso was hired yet she has turned it into one. How did she do it? By evaluating and recruiting. Nothing complicated about it and no easy fixes, just hard work. What worked for Patty will work for Sherri. For anyone to say it isn't possible to bring top basketball talent to OU is just goofy.
OK. You are beginning to think. But, it has nothing to do with Sherri's not liking recruiting or her staff. Nobody sane likes parts of recruiting.
Trying to use softball and gymnastics as comparisons is a complete lack of understanding of the situation. Different targets.
If we had had success with the tree that Courtney produced, it might have been enough to sustain a program. But, OU would still be at a disadvantage to the basketball recruit. As it stands, we can play on the edge of greatness, but we don't quite have the situation to compete with ND and UConn. We can compete with anyone else or get comparable results on a long-term basis. Without Sherri, we can't even begin to compete. But, we need some local luck to attain the UConn/ND level. They may begin to recede before we rise, but we won't rise without Sherri.
A very key element: if you are an inner-city recruit from Houston, NYC, Chicago, etc., what would attract you to Norman? Houston keeps losing its best to Stanford and USC, some to A&M. They lost one key one to Baylor, but I think the future of that relationship is suspect. So, the local inner-city kids are difficult to keep in this area. What would attract them to Norman?
Success breeds success. Every student-athlete is not looking for any other "attraction" other than SUCCESS. Why would DTaurasi leave southern California (UCLA, USC, Stanford...all in the state) to go to the cold winters of UCONN out in the middle of nowhere? SUCCESS! When OU lucked up on the Paris twins, they should have kept the signings going along with the visits they were getting. They didn't. AND...they needed more effective coaching and player development.
SoonerNorm
Super Moderator
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2008
- Messages
- 19,033
- Reaction score
- 1
Yeah, Sherri has always gone hard after those inner-city girls as have Notre Dame, Stanford, and UCONN. 
Let's keep the personal attacks out of this discussion please. I hear a lot of people say who would want to live in Norman, but it's up to Sherri to find the right things to say or a way to sale the program to recruits, and at this time she should be able to look at any top 5 post player in the conutry and say if you work hard you'll have a chance to start. I can see why an elite post player wouldn't want to come here if they didn't think they would have a chance to win, but I think the class we have coming in and we add little and Manning we have a chance to be a top 25 team again next year that's a great start to get kids to take notice of us again.
