SCU Men's Basketball - If We Build It - Will They Come?

                                                                

In December, 2013, the President's Blue Ribbon Commission issued a report to the SCU Trustees that, point blank, gave us an "F" for failure to fund Athletics over the past 20+ years.  We were near the bottom in almost every category compared to our WCC and National competitors.  The commission's analysis showed that success in Athletics provided substantial leverage that could impact many University strategic priorities.

Gee, ya think?  Gonzaga figured that out 25 years ago.  We all know how that turned out.

Fast forward to now.  BIG changes have occurred, but with the exception of Women's Soccer, we're still chasing national relevance in major sports and, particularly, in Men's Basketball.  

The May 1st groundbreaking of the Schott Athletics Excellence Center may finally  be the "tipping point" to the trajectory of Men's Basketball.  UP. 

The 2013 commission agreed to amp up funding.  But there was another idea, a BIG idea, costing BIG money.  

Who would be so bold?  Well - Herb Sendek.  

Rumor has it, the convo came up during his interview with Renee and then at a retreat during Coach Sendek's first year.  What do we need to attract the best possible student athletes that would allow us to challenge for titles in the WCC and post season?  

How about a "top 20" level facility that will change the current notion that SCU is a prodding along, mid- major program.  An athletics' center that can stand up next to anything that Villanova,  Gonzaga and others have to offer.  

Three years and $38 M later, rising from the dirt that was an athletics program on life support, is one of the boldest statements ever in SCU Athletics history.  The new center, is the half court, hail Mary "Schott" that we mean it; national relevance. 

The "U" and Trustees are "all in."  Blue Ribbon Commission 2.0 led, again, by John M. Sobrato will be happening in parallel.  Why?  To measure progress and, I hope, go faster.  If you're going to be competitive, you must beat your competition.  All WCC teams are investing.  It's not good enough anymore to keep pace, you have to try to "lap" the field. 


Of course, there will be rampant naysayers.  Can't blame them.  Wrong A.D., coaches, schedules, etc, etc.  It's a big bet.  Buildings before more scholarships to other sports, but at least we're taking chances!  One thing we know, the limp along strategy wasn't working.

If we build it, will they come?

Does it mean that all of the sudden we'll be stealing recruits from Duke?  Uh, no.  But, we will be able to offer a no compromises program for the athletes that fit the SCU profile.  

In the end, it's all about winning, not whining.  Been there, done that.  

Coach Sendek has called his own number at crunch time.  Can he deliver?   I like the game plan - now we just need to see it succeed on the Court at Leavey...


Also on Facebook: www.facebook.com/thebuckingbronco

SCU Men's Basketball Season: "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly"

                                                                        


Our 2018-19 season ended the way it started; with a resounding "thud."   The losses to USD and Prairie View were both symbolic and symptomatic of a team that played great at times, but had this penchant to self destruct.  

The Good - three upset wins against USC, USF, and Washington State.  The Bad - meltdowns against Prairie View, Idaho State, and USD in Las Vegas.  The Ugly - the two loses to LMU.  Despite all the roster triage, we left two more wins on the table. 

Among the thousands of alums, fans, and season ticket holders who follow the Broncos and this column, there's a camp that will say "considering" the loss of K.J. Feagin, Matt Hauser, and the injuries that shrunk our roster to seven scholarship players, this was a really good outcome.  I'm not in that camp.  

This was a talented team capable of better; but needed more.  More depth, more experience and more rest.  We played 20 of our 31 games with only eight scholarship players.  In the past 10 years, there have been just three other first year players who have logged more minutes in their first season than our only two guards.  

When you factor in transfers, we had eight first year new to the program players.  This steep learning curve reared its head in the five above mentioned losses; three of which we held significant halftime leads.  Our inconsistency was bi-polar; not chronic and very hard to stomach.

We didn't have one "go to" leader to stand up and take charge when we needed it most.  Say what you will, but IMHO, at crucial times this team lacked the will or stamina to compete when severely challenged.

OK, Freshman and Sophomore lineup, prone to errors, I get it.  BUT, what I don't get, is the lack of aggressive response and fundamentals when in the process of squandering big leads?  After twenty, maybe thirty games into the season, shouldn't our offense have "learned" to execute a play and get a good shot from one of our scorers?  Many times, when we did get a good shot, we missed repeatedly.  How about get the ball in bounds or up court or down low to a well positioned player instead of resorting to late in the clock dribbling one on ones?  How about a defensive stop or key rebound?  

That's where you need someone to step up.  We had plenty of guys, who in the moment, tried to be that go to.  In some cases, we made big plays, but during the tsunami of losing leads with LMU, we didn't have the "one" to settle us down.  Grab a key rebound, draw a foul to get free throws, make a great pass for a score. 

For all our offensive sins, most turnovers in the WCC, it was our defense that wavered most of the year.  Last in steals and from 7th to 9th in overall rebounding categories.  The most glaring example may have been our last game at LMU.  Ahead 19 at half and by 14 with 11:41 to go, we went 6 minutes without a point.  With 7:24 to go, we turned it over four times AND gave up seven offensive rebounds to lose by two....Bi-polar.

Hard to watch.  As bad as The W.tv is, this was worse.  You can't coach experience, but you can motivate effort.  Just review what USD did to us last Friday in the WCC Tournament and what they did to BYU the next night.  Yes, they have more experience, but they also had a lot of heart in the face of back to back to back games.

All in all, a 16-15 season was just OK.  Could have been better and certainly worse.  The impatience level for alums and fans for us to get better is very high.  Coach Sendek and his staff have produced two winning seasons in their first three years.  Next season, for the first time, the coaches will have their own hand-picked roster and will need to "own" more winning and challenge the WCC top three.

It was a year of WOW and WOE.  We've seen "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly."  I'm ready to see a different movie - something along the lines of the "Rocky" theme; where we learn to punch our way into the mix in the WCC and beyond.  

SCU Men's Basketball - Sixth - The Hard Way

                                                                           

In Las Vegas, you can bet the odds on just about anything.

While nothing has been easy in the WCC this season, falling from fifth to sixth in the Tournament seeding lowered our odds to advance and do some late season damage.  LMU just seems to have our "number."

Our tournament outlook, to use a Craps' term, is a "hard six."  At fifth we would have played the winner of Pepperdine/Pacific; against who we were 4-0 in league.  If we had won that game, we would have faced USF in the quarterfinals. 

Sixth means we will probably play USD; who should handle Portland.  Then, IF we get by USD, we have to go through BYU AND St. Mary's to advance.  That's why I call it a "hard six."  

Since 2007, we are 4 - 56 vs BYU and SMC.  With Coach Sendek, we are 1-13.  Long odds. 

BTW, the odds of a "hard six" happening in dice is < 3%.

USD is a tough out.  They are healthy and are  4-0 against USF and LMU.  In our win vs USD, they were without their starting point guard, Isaiah Wright, who is averaging 20ppg in his last two games.  Wright is not the only Isaiah to worry about.  Their "go to" player is senior 6' 7" forward Isaiah Pineiro.  He's a load at 19 points and 10 rebounds a game.  They start four seniors and a sophomore.  Experienced.  

To get by USD, we'll need to put together our two best "first half's" since our second half performances have been very inconsistent.  A winning formula for us will be to shoot it at our season average and to have more assists than turnovers.  

It would be great to get another shot at BYU on a neutral court. 

Eventually, one team will get the chance to meet Gonzaga in the final.  My sleeper pick is LMU.  They beat USF in San Francisco and have the best defense in the WCC; allowing only 59.5 points per game.   

The tournament will be the measure of how much we have "learned" in 30 games.  We all know, this season to date, we've been short on many things.  Guards, roster depth, rebounding, experience, and consistency to name a few.  

That's why we have "long odds" to make a run in the WCC tourney; where nothing is easy and we'll have to overcome the "hard six" seeding to feel like we're a team and a program on the rise.  

SCU Men's Basketball - The "Fifth" Perspective

                                                                       


With two games remaining we are in a position to place fifth in the WCC.  I guess when the media predictors pick you to be ninth, fifth looks much better.  The cliff-hanger home win vs # 50 ranked USF made us think, we have something going on here.  Helps to erase some of the sting of the big scoring margin losses to the top three, after which you may have felt like you should drink a "fifth" of something.

We could fall to sixth if we lose @ LMU who would then own the tiebreaker with us.  Nothing is set and there's a lot to shake out, but worst case we finish sixth.

So, is it better for us to be fifth or be sixth going into the tournament?  My recommendation is, gimmie five...

Here's why.  IF SMC, USF, and BYU all finish at 11-5, then USF should end up in second place as they own the tiebreaker with BYU, as they beat them twice and St. Mary's split with them.  St. Mary's should fall to third as they split with USF and BYU lost to USF twice.  Got that?? 

Fifth means we will probably play USD or Pacific.  It also means if we win that one, we would most likely play BYU in quarterfinals. 
Sixth means we play either Pepperdine or Portland.  If we win that round we would play St. Mary's in the quarters.  

IMHO, I like our chances vs BYU on a neutral court vs St. Mary's who dissected us twice this season. We were in the game with BYU in Provo; where arguably we were a couple of phantom calls away from overtime.  We weren't really close with either St. Mary's efforts eventually losing by 11 at home, but were down 23 points midway through the second half.  Our records vs both is not good, but St. Mary's just seems to pick us apart where BYU has a more run and gun approach; subject to some really poor shooting spells and turnovers.  

So, I'll take Fifth on this one.  At the end of the day if we win the first two tourney games we run into the Zags.  The Fifth Estate wouldn't give us very good odds on that one...

So, I'm going with Fifth, even if I have to "take the fifth" to not self incriminate, but I guess I've already done that.  This equates to a 17 win season.  Not that anyone cares about history, but that would be only the third time in the past 19 years with more than 17 wins.   Three....Ugh.  

Ironically, the quarterfinals is the fifth Men's game of the tournament and if we get there it would be our fifth consecutive win - Karma.   


Also on Facebook: www.facebook.com/thebuckingbronco

SCU Men's Basketball - Are We in Position to Finish This Season?

                                                             

With a record of 13-12, are we in position or out of position to finish our season with a winning record? 
  
Last week's games typified our entire season.  A superb road win at Pepperdine and then a close road loss at USF.  A seesaw year that began with significant roster changes that has resulted in too many turnovers per game.

Not that history matters, but you have to go back 10 years to find a higher T.O. number.  The stat that is our Achilles' Heel this season is the points scored against us via turnovers.  In a sampling of eight recent games, four wins and four losses, the points scored against us off turnovers is 124.  More grist in league play, we are averaging more turnovers, 14.4, than assists; 11.

It's an awkward position to be in when most of your starters are playing out of their normal position.  On top of all that, four starters are in their first year in Coach Sendek's system.  I guess the result of all the roster turnover is more turnovers.  

Should be an easy coaching fix.  Right.  Imagine the situation.  Lose three starters to injury and all your point guards.  Convert your only two remaining guards, who were recruited as shooting guards to play point with no/little D1 experience.  No problem.

In business, it might be like asking your best salesperson to become your CFO...or a history teacher forced to teach calculus ?

I'm NOT trying to give the coaches a pass, even with better athletes, it's a hard thing for first year players to learn a new position at a new level of competition.  All of these growing pains are unfolding in front of our season ticket holders and fans who don't have much patience left after waiting 20+ seasons...

Paradoxically, even though our players are playing out of position, we are in a position to finish with a winning record. 

Of our five remaining games, three are at home (SMC, Pacific, USF) and two away (LMU, Portland).  Going 3-2 would be great ending at 16-14 and 8-8 in league.  We can't take anything for granted.  FYI, LMU is 10-2 at home this year.  Even with a 2-3 outcome, we finish the season 15-15 and 7-9 in the WCC. 

IF we can do 8-8 in league and the other teams achieve their expected wins, it creates a potential logjam in the final league standings and an interesting seeding for the WCC tourney.  At 8-8 we could finish as high as solo 5th.  The shakeout at the top between SMC, BYU, and USF will determine our fate as will what happens with Pepperdine, USD, and LMU.

Of the top tier teams SMC and USF have easier schedules than BYU.  My pick is for USF, SMC, and BYU to all finish 11-5.  BYU and USF could run the table and get to 12-4.  Doubtful.

We are in the mushy middle with Pepperdine (5-6), LMU (5-6) and USD (5-5).  All of them have the tougher schedules remaining.  Pepp plays away at USF, SMC, and Gonzaga.  LMU plays at home vs  Gonzaga and BYU, then away at USF.  USD has BYU twice, SMC, Gonzaga, and at USF.  Ugh...

If it comes down to us and Pepperdine for 5th place at 8-8 or 7-9, we own the head to head tiebreaker with them.  

We have a lot to play for.  We all wonder, "which SCU team" is going to show up.  The team that lost to Prairie View or the team that beat USC?  

As season ticket holders and fans, we'll be in our usual positions at Leavey helping to rally our guys to "turn it up" rather than turn it over.



Also on Facebook: www.facebook.com/thebuckingbronco

Santa Clara Athletics - What's Our Program "G.P.A."

                                                                   

Three and a half years ago, Fr. Engh's Blue Ribbon Commission on Athletics and the Trustees made the decision to invest in Santa Clara Athletics with the goal to become nationally relevant in major sports by the 2020-21 season.  

Their first major decision was the hiring of Dr. Renee Baumgartner as Athletics Director.  

Now, three + years into the makeover, I was wondering, where are we?  What is our athletics "G.P.A." - Game Performances Average?  

There's no question, the entire foundation of athletics has been turned on its ear, from a program that was on was on life support funding for 50 years, to one that has "venture fund" type capital to invest and resuscitate our Athletics' reputation.  

I can just imagine what the A.D. search committee presented as the challenges to overcome.  "We have a rich tradition of Athletic success that we wish to re-invigorate and get to National relevance.  You'll have our full support and commitment do this.  A couple of things you should know as you consider this opportunity."

Your Athletics' operating budget is the lowest in the WCC.
Your major sports recruiting budget is constrained. 
You have 40 fewer scholarships than your WCC competitors. 
Your athletics' facilities are outdated and need a make over.
Many of your coaches have to fundraise to make ends meet.
It has been 20+ years since two of your most visible major sports, Men's Basketball and Baseball's, last NCAA tournament appearance.
Your alums and fan base feel dis-connected to the program.
The students who would support you, weren't yet born the last time Men's Basketball went to the NCAA tournament.

BUT, there are also positives.  In 2015, you'll inherit a strong group of coaches and teams.  W. Soccer is a perennial NCAA tournament team and already a national power.  W. Basketball had a good 2015 -16 season earning a WNIT bid after 11 years since their last NCAA invite.  W. Volleyball made the NCAA tournament in 2015 and has 11 other NCAA trips from 2000-2018.  Lastly, M. Soccer made the 2015 NCAA tourney after a five year hiatus. 

Sounds like the "dream" job, doesn't it?  You're hired!  Now go win WCC titles and get Men's Basketball and Baseball to the NCAA tournament, preferably now, but certainly by the 2020-21 season...

I admire the dedication of all the prior coaches and what they accomplished with these constraints.

So, after all the above, what's changed?  Is our G.P.A. in major sports on track to national relevance?  Honestly, there's been massive changes, but at mid-terms, our G.P.A. is a work in progress.

Consider this.  Since July 2015, out of the seven most visible programs mentioned above, there are five new coaches; most of them in their first or second seasons.  Complete reboot.
Culturally, winning is a real coaching measurement.  Gone are the Kumbya days of "nice try."
The scholarship deltas vs other WCC schools is being whittled down, but still a long way to go.  For example, with more scholarships, Men's Golf has been able to earn their highest national ranking.  
Coaches no longer have to fundraise to make their program budget work.  
Facilities have had a big make over and are actually starting to look like a top tier D1 program.  The newly approved Athletic Excellence Center will make a major statement about where our program wants to go; much like what the amazing Campus build out has done for our academic reputation.  
Recruiting budgets now support more international travel where we can build an SCU pipeline of players. 
There is real marketing money not only for game day promotions, but to legitimize "stampede ahead" as part of our active branding strategy.
Additional Athletic support staffing has been beefed up with experienced people to provide more horsepower to make our teams more successful.

As alums and fans. we take our pot shots that we're still not winning enough and competitive with the top three in WCC MBB as well as complaints that Renee and Coach Sendek were the wrong choices - one inexperienced and the other past his prime.  

I'm as impatient as the next person, but sometimes I feel like my/our arrogance gets in the way of reality.  I'll call it the "big hat, no cattle" syndrome.  

The expectations that just because we're Santa Clara we should just be better without laying the foundation and doing the hard work it takes to actually get better.  That it's somehow easy to reverse 50 years of athletic program mediocrity in three years.

I wish it was - and I hate it that it's not.

But, the BIGGEST thing for me is that we ARE investing!  Building a foundation with real money and commitment not have just a "one and done," but sustained successes.  Mistakes and missteps are going to happen.  This is uncharted territory for SCU - actually saying out loud and trying to achieve national relevance.  

SCU is arguably best suited among the WCC teams not named Gonzaga or BYU to get it done.  It's not just big thinking that makes this happen, but big $$$$.   Our new Billion dollar campaign speaks to this overall vision.  I haven't heard of any other WCC school even dream about; let alone raising a Billion.  

I have no idea if Renee and Coach Sendek can get us there on the Athletics and MBB fronts.  I do know they're putting in the work.  

Right now our Athletic's G.P.A. is about a 2.5 or C+.  A strong foundation for the long term is happening.  However, since 2015, there's not enough winning in major sports.  Five new head coaches and staffs are working hard to build contenders.  For example, Men's Baseball, under first year coach Rusty 
Filter, doubled their prior year win total finishing with a 26-26 season.   FYI, Baseball hasn't had a break even or better season in nine years.  

Men's Basketball is still floundering against the WCC top three in what's become a "triage" season.  Three starters lost and four of the guys playing new positions.  Of our last seven games, four are on the road and three are at Leavey - including St. Mary's and USF.

There's lots of learning and studying going on and finals are approaching - "national relevance by 2020-21."

It's certainly a roller coaster, but a ride I'd rather be on than just sitting on the sidelines like the past 50 years.


Also on Facebook: www.facebook.com/thebuckingbronco

SCU Men's Basketball - Last Week was "Weak"

                                                                   

Last week was a tough one, not just for the players and coaches, but for our whole MBB program.  An all time record loss blowout by Gonzaga followed by a blown second half at home vs LMU.

It couldn't have come at a worse time.  Just when upbeat feelings of seven straight wins and some bounce back wins after road losses had Bronco fans believing again - just maybe.

It's a conundrum.  How do our young players perform so well under pressure with O.T. wins over USC and a road win at Washington State?  Followed by second half comeback wins over Pepperdine and Pacific?  Then whoosh, gone.  Program momentum capital squandered.  

Coach Sendek's pillars of "learn and improve" seemed to be taking root, then came the "root canal" of last week.  Ouch!  

There are lots of Bronco alums and fans who talk about getting MBB back to the successes of the "good  old" days.  Well, honestly, with the exception of the Nash years, maybe not that good.  Chew on this.

Since the 1970-71 season, in 48 years of Bronco MBB have exactly three WCC titles, two of them Co-Champs.  Three.  We have four NCAA appearances.  Three with the Steve Nash teams.  That's it folks.  48 years!!!

Maybe our best performances were our four NIT appearances; two of which, '88 & '89, were with a roster that was without superstars. 

Now, all of the sudden we're supposed to be a WCC top level team in Coach Sendek's third season.  Dream on...At LEAST, after 48 years of flat-lined MBB budgets, the University leadership team is investing.  We don't know if Coach Sendek and his staff can get us to a national level or not.  We'll find out in 2-3 more years.  Right now, a long way to go.  

My/our biggest hope is that the Trustees remain strong and committed for the long term.  Don't give in and don't accept mediocrity.  It took Gonzaga nearly 26 years to become relevant.  After all their NCAA run successes, IMHO it wasn't until the past four seasons that the power conference teams took them seriously.  

Our team acts like the have the "terrible two's."  As parents/coaches, we know the act.  They have wonderful minutes of being the greatest child, taught by the best parents ever, followed by hours and hours of going rogue; where nothing seems to work.  Meltdowns.  Just like the LMU game.  

The team practices the offense and defense every single day.  How do they seem to forget what to do, come completely unraveled?  Forget to play basketball?  With a short roster, is it fatigue?

That's why last week was "weak."  Whatever "will" to compete we've had in earlier games seemed to evaporate.  

On offense, instead of the ball moving, it devolved into late shot clock, low percentage efforts.  My unofficial count was 10 of those in the second half.   Of our 31 or so second half possessions:  23 points on (7-26 FG),   3Pt FG (4-17) combined with 8 turnovers.

Not a winning recipe.

I'm sure the coaches would say that with our lack of depth, the margin for error in every game is very small.  Particularly, at Guard where we have only two with neither of them playing their natural positions.  It's evident and easier to coach against us - pressure them everywhere.

They play 36+ minutes per game because they have to.  Fatigue is a factor in a very long season for first year players.  Expect more of the above.

Some impatient fans think, "well, with experienced coaches, they should be able to fix that or make adjustments."  Garbage.  Like it or not, you can't teach experience; the thing we don't have.  The biggest impact of our coaching is to accelerate the learning and development process.  Time will tell.

With eight WCC regular season games left, we need to get STRONGER.  

We need stronger game plans, stronger offense and defense, and the will to compete every game.   Get rid of the weak stuff and play with some old Bronco toughness.  



Also on Facebook: www.facebook.com/thebuckingbronco.