Jordan Hare

eli#10 · Unread post by **eli#10** » 11 years ago

Jordan staying here is HUGE. Next year I expect a lot of full court pressure with Jordan being the last guy back with a lot of quickness and jumping ability which should help slow down the other team when they are able to break the press. Baron's full court press was a joke and often was like a lay up drill for the opposition. That was one of many reasons why I stopped going to the games. Will Martell was way too slow to be the last guy back on defense. Jordan will be such an improvement.................

luke · Unread post by **luke** » 11 years ago

God isn't that the truth. Their feeble press used to drive me crazy. Early in the game it was like spotting the other team points.

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 11 years ago

eli#10 wrote:Jordan staying here is HUGE. Next year I expect a lot of full court pressure with Jordan being the last guy back with a lot of quickness and jumping ability which should help slow down the other team when they are able to break the press. Baron's full court press was a joke and often was like a lay up drill for the opposition. That was one of many reasons why I stopped going to the games. Will Martell was way too slow to be the last guy back on defense. Jordan will be such an improvement.................

Maybe the players weren't great at playing Baron's press, but I think it had a lot more to do with the fact that it was a poorly coached press. I agree about Jordan being sort of the safety, the last line of defense on the press. That is something I think he could end up doing very well.

Rhody72 · Unread post by **Rhody72** » 11 years ago

JH showed me enough as a freshman to see how he progresses physically and basketball-wise for next season. If JB stayed, JH would be behind Vedder until he was a senior.

eli#10 · Unread post by **eli#10** » 11 years ago

A SI article last week on Larry Sanders of VCU and now the NBA Bucks stated that he averaged 5 points and 5 rebounds as a freshman. JH averaged 5 points and 4 rebounds--let's be patient.

RIFan · Unread post by **RIFan** » 11 years ago

This is the year for JH...as we all know usually the biggest jump in production is the sophomore season. If we don't see it this year, then you think about cutting bait.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 11 years ago

RIFan wrote:This is the year for JH...as we all know usually the biggest jump in production is the sophomore season. If we don't see it this year, then you think about cutting bait.

What do you mean by "cut bait"?

bressler3south · Unread post by **bressler3south** » 11 years ago

As in, "Get the hell outta here." Not exactly the way to run a program….RIFan makes it sound like he's on the coaching staff…or a damned good fisherman!

RIFan · Unread post by **RIFan** » 11 years ago

I mean you would encourage him to find a school where he might fit in better.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 11 years ago

I'd encourage you to find a board where you might fit in better. We don't run players off here.

(I don't really want you to leave, I just want you to think about how you talk about these kids. They aren't commodities. This isn't pro sports - you don't just cut or trade players if they're struggling or they're hurt. These kids are part of our university family.)

RIFan · Unread post by **RIFan** » 11 years ago

My words were not well chosen to express my sentiment...I made a rash statement. I agree they should not be run out...an honest evaluation should be made with each player at he end of the season and if the staff sees a reduced roll for a player he should be told, so they can either work to improve or find a situation they they will be happier with.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 11 years ago

I get that I'm overly sensitive about this issue. I've argued with others about it before, too, and I don't want to argue with people. I agree that if a coach is honest with a kid about their basketball situation and the kid chooses to leave, that is fine. The coach should be honest and the player should do what is best for him. But I just hate the idea that we would force a kid out of the program that wants to be a part of it. I don't want to be that kind of a program. Once a kid commits to us as a senior in high school, we should be committed to him for four years.

reef · Unread post by **reef** » 11 years ago

I am still optimistic about Hare, I think he will be a contributor off the bench

Rhody72 · Unread post by **Rhody72** » 11 years ago

I read RIFan's recent post to be similar to what he later expressed he meant by "cut bait". If JH doesn't improve immeasurably next season, then URI needs to "cut bait" and look for a center who can significantly contribute to an NCAA Tournament team.

Coaches don't recruit players whom you don't project as being a significant contributor to their program's goals. Players should not go to a college where they don't believe that they can be a significant contributor to the program's goals. Basketball expectations is the most important determinant in whether a player accepts a scholarship that is offered by a college. That said, all scholarships are for one year - player know it and the coach knows it. If expectations are not met, then the coach and the player have to agree that a new lower expectation is valuable to the program's goals. If there is no such mutual agreement, then the scholarship should not be renewed and the player can either pay his own way or move on to where he is a better fit.

This notion that there is some type of moral obligation to keep a player on scholarship for four years regardless of his ability to contribute to the program's goals is non-sense. Once you become a player on the team doesn't mean that you have received tenure any more than any student who fails to meet minimum academic requirements or good citizen obligations is allowed to stay enrolled. Players get cut from teams - that's life; this isn't D3.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 11 years ago

72, this is one time I agree with you.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 11 years ago

I couldn't disagree more. If a kid is insubordinate or doesn't do his work in the classroom, then the he surrenders his right to a scholarship. But if you just made a mistake and misevaluated him during the recruiting process? That's your problem. This whole system is set up to take advantage of and exploit kids. The only thing they get in the deal is an education. They should be able to trust the fact that won't be taken from them or put in jeopardy during the recruiting process. Only an old guy whose identity is wrapped up in whether the team he roots for wins and doesn't care about the kids who represent the university would advocate cutting kids who put in the effort that is asked of them. We all want to win, but the mission and the integrity of the university has to come first. This isn't the SEC.

Running Ram · Unread post by **Running Ram** » 11 years ago

Anyone who thinks Hare doesn't have the goods to be a major contributor going forward is mistaken. I for one hope to see him complete his 4 years in a Rams uni. Lets not forget he is only a sophomore, he's just getting his college legs under him. The sky is the limit for a kid with so much height and athleticism.

Keaney.Blue · Unread post by **Keaney.Blue** » 11 years ago

TruePoint wrote:I couldn't disagree more. If a kid is insubordinate or doesn't do his work in the classroom, then the he surrenders his right to a scholarship. But if you just made a mistake and misevaluated him during the recruiting process? That's your problem. This whole system is set up to take advantage of and exploit kids. The only thing they get in the deal is an education. They should be able to trust the fact that won't be taken from them or put in jeopardy during the recruiting process. Only an old guy whose identity is wrapped up in whether the team he roots for wins and doesn't care about the kids who represent the university would advocate cutting kids who put in the effort that is asked of them. We all want to win, but the mission and the integrity of the university has to come first. This isn't the SEC.

It's refreshing to know we have fans who see the bigger picture.

Blue Man · Unread post by **Blue Man** » 11 years ago

TruePoint wrote:I couldn't disagree more. If a kid is insubordinate or doesn't do his work in the classroom, then the he surrenders his right to a scholarship. But if you just made a mistake and misevaluated him during the recruiting process? That's your problem. This whole system is set up to take advantage of and exploit kids. The only thing they get in the deal is an education. They should be able to trust the fact that won't be taken from them or put in jeopardy during the recruiting process. Only an old guy whose identity is wrapped up in whether the team he roots for wins and doesn't care about the kids who represent the university would advocate cutting kids who put in the effort that is asked of them. We all want to win, but the mission and the integrity of the university has to come first. This isn't the SEC.

Thank you.

It'd be disgusting to become a program that looked at it that way. When the "right way" is talked about - it's not about how many minutes you're on the phone with a recruit, or whether you helped out a player by buying him dinner...the NCAA regulations are more or less bullshit and it's a business essentially built on slave labor.

What a business model - make millions and don't pay your employees shit.

To think that there are people that are a part of our URI community that honestly believe we should just cut a kid - AN 18 YEAR OLD FRESHMAN WHO PLAYED ONE SEASON IN COLLEGE OUT OF POSITION IN A NEW STATE WITH A NEW COACH ON A NEW TEAM - is disgusting and asinine.

He's not even 19 friggin years old. Jesus.

And on top of all of that, if you don't think this kid is going to be something special with coaching you're a moron.

His kind of athletic talent can't be taught. His technique inside, shooting, and defensive movements can. This isn't the Baron years where players are left to their own devices to develop over their time here. If you believe in this coaching staff, I don't know what you're bitching about. HE'S A FRESHMAN. Some people are talking about him like he's a senior or NBA all-star on a down year.

This isn't Kentucky where freshmen come in to start. Most freshmen are raw and need time to develop. Plus he needs time to eat.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 11 years ago

Blue Man & Keaney_Blue, good to know I'm not alone in this. I'd also just like to point out that I don't even think this is an issue for Jordan. I think Jordan is going to be really good. The conversation just started in this thread. I will probably move this discussion to its own thread if other people want to chime in.

bressler3south · Unread post by **bressler3south** » 11 years ago

"FAMILY, TEAM, URI, 'OUR PROGRAM,' RAH-RAH-RAH!!!!!!!!!!" Well, if that's the case and coaches want to be known as MEN who are honest, kept their word, well, you don't run off people, etc., so some forum bloggers feel better about themselves asap!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I WANT URI TO BECOME THE PRE-EMINENT UNIVERSITY IN THE COUNTRY, THE GREATEST HOOPS PROGRAM IN THE WHOLE NORTHEAST, REPLACING UCONN! BECOME THE BEST OF EVERYTHING WHERE EVERYONE IN ANY FIELD WANTS TO BE!!!!
I WANT THIS TO LAST THE REST OF MY LIFE, WHEREAS FOR THE LAST 50 YEARS, ONE MENTIONED URI AND THE RESPONSE WAS LIKE YOU WERE SCHIZOID AND BELONGED IN BUTLER OR BELLEVUE BECAUSE NO MATTER HOW GREAT YOUR ASPIRATIONS WERE FOR THE UNIVERSITY, THE SPORTS TEAMS, ETC., NO MATTER WHAT YOU DID OR WANTED TO DO, THERE WERE ALWAYS SHITHEADS IN YOUR WAY TRYING TO TEAR DOWN ANYTHING -- ANYTHING POSITIVE YOU DID OR WAS DONE ON BEHALF OF THE UNIVERSITY.
THIS TAKES TIME!!!!! AND IF YOU DON'T WANT TO BUILD WITH SOMEONE LIKE HURLEY, GET ON THE GANG-BANG WAGON WITH FLASH-IN-THE-PAN-SANCTIONED-WHORE-PROGRAMS -- AND CUT EFFIN' BAIT.
Not every 5-star, McDonald's A-A, Jordan Brand Classic, Rivals Top 50 player who was recruited and signed by Duke, NC, KY, UCLA, Pitt, ET AL., cracked the starting 5, never mind made the NB-FREAKIN' A, and many of them were marginal players for one reason or another -- and stayed.
For years I've been reading this board, the ProJo board, etc., and for every repetitive, ignorant, stupid comment made by a "DEDICATED MEMBER OF THE URI BASKETBALL FAMILY" did I think, Jeez, CUT BAIT WITH THIS IDIOT, SEND HIM TO THE RANDOLPH-MACON, CURRY COLLEGE, SOUTHERN NH EFFIN' BOARD.

COACH HURLEY WAS APPROXIMATELY 200 GAMES ABOVE .500 AT ST. BENEDICT'S IN X YEARS!!!! WHAT WAS ST. BENEDICT'S BEFORE THAT?!? HE BECAME A MAGNET FOR WHAT THE SCHOOL ENVSIONED!! WHAT HE ENVISIONED!! HE KNEW THE MODEL (ST. ANTHONY'S). HE FOLLOWED IT. IT EFFIN' WORKS!!!!

"Think Big, We Do." WHOOP-DEE-EFFIN'-DOOOOOOOO!!!!
THINK THE BEST, BE VISIONARIES, DO YOUR BEST, BUILD IT, AND DON'T FU*%#!G STOP THERE!!!!!!!!

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 11 years ago

I think some people here need a valium.
This is a discussion board, and not everyone sees Jordan Hare
as the next Hakeem Olajuon.
I won't go into the multitude of things he's weak at, and needs to improve on.
He needs to commit himself to improving his game. If he doesn't, he'll be sitting on the bench.
That Hurley is looking for a bigman, should tell anyone whose eyes are open, plenty.
Being a scholarship D-1 athlete is a privilege, not a right.
However, I am not advocating brizzing him.
It's all up to Hare to put the effort in and improve.
The decision in the end, may not be Dan Hurley's but, Jordan Hare's.

twisted3829 · Unread post by **twisted3829** » 11 years ago

I don't think he'll be a star but he can be a key contributor in the future

bressler3south · Unread post by **bressler3south** » 11 years ago

Thanks, Rod!!! After re-reading my post, I wanted to pop a few Valium, but there weren't any by my bedside…..NURSE!!! NURSE!!!!

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 11 years ago

Hey, it's all good! We all want the best for our program.

bigappleram · Unread post by **bigappleram** » 11 years ago

IMO at URI you dont walk away from guys who can take quarters off the top of backboards after 1 season.

he was routinely playing guys 30-40 pounds heavier than him, with 3-4 years of college experience. of course he looked bad in the process.

it will ultimately come down to his desire to be great, hopefully DH can bring that out in him. god knows he will have stiff comp for playing time next year with Biruta, Iffy and Aaman in the fold. he will have no choice but to step up.

theblueram · Unread post by **theblueram** » 11 years ago

Wow,this is going to be a fun off season!

URI96 · Unread post by **URI96** » 11 years ago

RIFan wrote:My words were not well chosen to express my sentiment...I made a rash statement. I agree they should not be run out...an honest evaluation should be made with each player at he end of the season and if the staff sees a reduced roll for a player he should be told, so they can either work to improve or find a situation they they will be happier with.

The term is Brizzed anyway..

Captainron@ · Unread post by **Captainron@** » 11 years ago

You don't give up on big men after a year or two... You just don't

RIhoopz14 · Unread post by **RIhoopz14** » 11 years ago

twisted3829 wrote:I don't think he'll be a star but he can be a key contributor in the future

Exactly! I've been a fan of Hare since he's been here even through the games where he played terrible. Some people dont realize that even if he isn't a "star" or didn't live up to their expectations, he can still be a valuable contributor to this team. Just like TJ would come in and play great D, Hare's specialty could be considered as making the "big play" or "pace-changers" with highlight-reel dunks and blocks. From what has been reported, he needs to put in more effort to improve, but to say that we should just get rid of an athletic 6'10 guy is crazy. He'll have a role whether a starter or not

RIFan · Unread post by **RIFan** » 11 years ago

http://www.teamspeedkills.com/2012/1/17 ... t-the-same

I thought people might find this interesting...

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 11 years ago

RIFan, thank you for posting that. I think that sums up my perspective pretty well. I think this is the key point:

The thing to remember is that these are scholarships we’re talking about: grants that exist to help people attend school and work towards a degree. If you’re going to completely throw out the window any consideration of the fact that these are students working towards a diploma, then college athletics should be broken off from universities entirely into professional minor leagues.

I also cosign the addendum, and I think I explained that in my prior post because I don't want to seem unreasonable:

ADDENDUM

I should mention that I'm not in favor of making it so athletic scholarships can only be ended for things like career ending injuries (which are already covered under medical disqualification scholarships) or arrests. If a player doesn't respect the leadership, blows off practice, or becomes a serial loafer for reasonable values of "loafer", then pulling the scholarship should be on the table.

However, I do think there should be some kind of paper trail to prevent coaches from solving their high school talent evaluation shortcomings or oversigning issues by suddenly revoking scholarships. If a player isn't performing to expectations, there needs to be written proof that the player is aware of it long before a scholarship gets taken away. There also should be some kind of provision to keep players with a history of non-career ending injuries from being cut, because there's little to nothing they can do to prevent or reverse their loss of effectiveness.

eli#10 · Unread post by **eli#10** » 11 years ago

Anyone who does not want Hare back knows absolutely nothing about college basketball!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! There is nothing to further discuss on this matter.

Rhody72 · Unread post by **Rhody72** » 11 years ago

Another example that shows why there is nothing wrong with not renewing scholarships is URI's requirement that Presidential Scholars attain certain GPAs to keep their scholarships. Why are those posters who feel athletic scholarships are for four years not aghast by URI's academic scholarship issue?

BTW, as I have said above, I saw enough this past season to believe that Jordan Hare's scholarship should be renewed. D1 athletes should be expected to produce to keep their scholarships. If a HC wants to make a personal commitment to renew a recruit's scholarship for 4 years to an athlete that is not backed by URI, then that is OK with me. The HC should be 100% responsible for the success of their program

Unread post by **ATPTourFan** » 11 years ago

I know first hand how Pres Scholaships come and go based on GPA.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 11 years ago

Rhody72 wrote:Another example that shows why there is nothing wrong with not renewing scholarships is URI's requirement that Presidential Scholars attain certain GPAs to keep their scholarships. Why are those posters who feel athletic scholarships are for four years not aghast by URI's academic scholarship issue?

BTW, as I have said above, I saw enough this past season to believe that Jordan Hare's scholarship should be renewed. D1 athletes should be expected to produce to keep their scholarships. If a HC wants to make a personal commitment to renew a recruit's scholarship for 4 years to an athlete that is not backed by URI, then that is OK with me. The HC should be 100% responsible for the success of their program

Do you read any of the counterarguments to what you're saying, including the article that was posted three posts above yours that directly takes on and dismantles the point you just made about academic scholarships? Or do you just walk around with your head down and your fingers in your ears saying the same thing over and over? There are plenty of posts in this thread that address your points and explain why we disagree. Your post doesn't address any of our points, it just reasserts the same position: that athletic success is more important than the school's academic mission or its obligation to its students. We heard you, and we responded. Do you have any thoughts on our arguments?

Rhody72 · Unread post by **Rhody72** » 11 years ago

TP, the posting on differences inspired me to write my post. I don't agree that academic grades are totally objective. There can be a great degree of subjectivity in assigning final grades. And, just as academic warnings of poor performance are given, any coach worth his salt gives similar warnings to under-performing athletes. Just because something appears on the Internet doesn't make it true.

Players are not bound to stay at a school for four years, nor are schools bound to an athlete for four years. This is laid out in detail in the LOI signed by athletes so there is no question about this. To say that there is a four year obligations is transparently invalid. If you sign an LOI, it means that you accept what is says. whether you agree or not.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 11 years ago

All I can say is that we disagree, then.

Miramfan · Unread post by **Miramfan** » 11 years ago

TruePoint wrote:I'd encourage you to find a board where you might fit in better. We don't run players off here.

(I don't really want you to leave, I just want you to think about how you talk about these kids. They aren't commodities. This isn't pro sports - you don't just cut or trade players if they're struggling or they're hurt. These kids are part of our university family.)

I agree with TP. If your school gets a rep of cutting players for not playing that well it will really hurt future recruiting. I can imagine another coach telling a recruit, "If you go there and you end up sitting on the bench, the coach is going to cut you." Or imagine this; the college coach goes back to the high school or AAU coach after he cut a player for such a reason and says, although he/she was a good kid and student we cut him/her because we got better players and we did not want to wait to develop them. By the way, do you have any other players?

I believe that if a kid is a cancer to the team then their scholarship should be in jeopardy. This is why scholarships are year to year, so schools are not stuck with a cancer for four years.

jaywin86 · Unread post by **jaywin86** » 11 years ago

quick update. Jordan Hare is back in team workouts for the past two days. good news, for an awful Monday afternoon.

Iggy1979 · Unread post by **Iggy1979** » 11 years ago

Coaches meet with each player after a season and tell them what they have to work on. To some, they say, I don't see you playing much next year but you're welcome to stay on the team if you want.
To others, they say, we're not going to have you back next year; you should go somewhere where it's a better fit.
Happens everywhere. Baron did it at URI. Hurley told Rayvon Harris and Vedder they weren't good enough. Both had good grades, good attitudes. It was all about ability.
It would only affect recruiting if it happened a lot. Otherwise, no. Recruits don't think it will happen to them anyway.
I don't see that as "running off a player." I see it as a coach being honest with a player.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 11 years ago

Hurley also wanted nothing to do with McCoy and Shengalia, either.

RIFan · Unread post by **RIFan** » 11 years ago

Let's be honest...only very few people care how you win...most only care that you win. Just look at Louisville and Kentucky. Everybody knows these programs are slimy...but yet they make their schools big bucks and have tons of happy fans. I am not advocating we stoop to that level...but it shows you that winning is what matters most to the vast majority...not how you did it. To be clear I believe in open communication and being honest with the kids, you recruited them and you owe them that.

Major college sports operate in a perverse system that generates billions of dollars a year off the backs of free labor, and both Kentucky and Louisville are willing participants. But if no basketball program does a better job of making the system look ridiculous than Kentucky, perhaps no basketball program is right now doing a better job of epitomizing the lies on which that system is built than Louisville.

http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/2013/03 ... ?mobile=nc

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 11 years ago

Iggy, I don't care where it happens. It is wrong to push out a kid you recruited that keeps up his end of the bargain in the classroom and in the program. Period. I can see where a coach taking over a new program could let some guys go if he wouldn't have recruited them, especially in basketball where you can't hide a guy on your roster like you can in football. But if you recruited him, you made a deal: give me the next four years and I'll give you the chance to set yourself up for the next forty. If you misjudged his ability, do a better job. That is on you.

Look at it like a family, and recruiting is like an adoption. Once you take the kid on, it is your responsibility. Nobody made you take him into your family. If it doesn't go exactly how you want it, you're a piece of shit if you drop the kid back off at the orphanage. Its an ethical and moral issue.

Iggy1979 · Unread post by **Iggy1979** » 11 years ago

TruePoint wrote:Iggy, I don't care where it happens. It is wrong to push out a kid you recruited that keeps up his end of the bargain in the classroom and in the program. Period. I can see where a coach taking over a new program could let some guys go if he wouldn't have recruited them, especially in basketball where you can't hide a guy on your roster like you can in football. But if you recruited him, you made a deal: give me the next four years and I'll give you the chance to set yourself up for the next forty. If you misjudged his ability, do a better job. That is on you.

Look at it like a family, and recruiting is like an adoption. Once you take the kid on, it is your responsibility. Nobody made you take him into your family. If it doesn't go exactly how you want it, you're a piece of shit if you drop the kid back off at the orphanage. Its an ethical and moral issue.

We'll have to disagree on this one. When Baron famously pushed Chris Holm off the team, he did him a big favor. Holm went on to have a nice career at Vermont. Under your philosophy, Baron would've honored a four-year commitment and buried the kid at the end of the bench.
You can be against and you can say it's wrong. But it happens routinely.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 11 years ago

Agree with Iggy on this one.

It happens, like it or not. And sometimes it works out well for the player and the program.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 11 years ago

In that situation, Chris is welcomed to go if he thinks he is truly better off elsewhere. You cannot be a good person and recruit a kid to come to your school then kick him out of school because you aren't good at your job.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 11 years ago

It happens in every school for many reasons.
That's the reality.
We're no different or holier than anyone else.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 11 years ago

I know for a fact that it does not happen everywhere. It certainly happens in the SEC, where athletes are treated like cattle, and those coaches are looked at as an example of everything that is wrong with college athletics. I suppose there isn't a rule book for fans requiring you to care about the kids, but if you have any part of you that cares about these kids as more than names in your program you can't be OK with your school churning them and then throwing them away when you're done with them. Like I said, it is a matter of morals and ethics, and it is pretty revealing that there are people here who aren't even ashamed to take the position that it is OK to dispose of kids like they are garbage.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 11 years ago

So kids with lousy attitudes, bad grades, and lazy work habits, should
have their scholarships honored? Not realistic. Sorry.
It's a two way street. As Hurley said,
"We treat scholarships like gold!"

Login • Register