|
|
Post by BBFran on Aug 24, 2017 11:43:11 GMT -6
By the way, the game at Wisconsin should be a great measuring stick for how our administrator has moved the program forward since March of 2015.
|
|
|
|
Post by steveisback on Aug 24, 2017 12:01:21 GMT -6
Don,t recall a lot of carping about the schedules in the past under Rob. Actually they were pretty good overall especially with the mid major challenges inherent. What I do remember is how ridiculously late each year it seemed putting them together but beyond that?  |
|
|
|
Post by FTA1982 on Aug 24, 2017 12:57:17 GMT -6
By the way, the game at Wisconsin should be a great measuring stick for how our administrator has moved the program forward since March of 2015. Just like scoring 39 and losing by 30 in 2004-2005 was a great barometer how that season ended up. |
|
|
|
Post by striker14 on Aug 24, 2017 13:14:19 GMT -6
What's the big deal about FIU? It's not like we were world beaters last season. Looks like this year we have some winnable games and some decent opponents. Seems alright to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by ghostofdylan on Aug 24, 2017 13:16:43 GMT -6
FTA's right. The overall and conference records and final RPI will be a much better barometer.
For the record, I really like the fact that there are no regular-season games at the Klotsche.
Thank God no one had a notion to move the Western Michigan game there. I think that I'm almost over the last one!
|
|
|
|
Post by BBFran on Aug 24, 2017 13:38:52 GMT -6
By the way, the game at Wisconsin should be a great measuring stick for how our administrator has moved the program forward since March of 2015. Just like scoring 39 and losing by 30 in 2004-2005 was a great barometer how that season ended up. I don't know what Pearl's failures have to do with anything. Last time we played the Badgers at Madison we were fairly competitive, as I recall. (I doubt that our administrator recalls it; she was nowhere to be seen.) Actually, you should welcome a "one-game" barometer. There's always a chance. Obviously it would be idiotic to expect this team to actually beat high major programs like Iowa State or UW, especially on the road. We are years away from that -- and that's if everything goes well in the rebuilding process. But you want to see a team that is at least disciplined and competitive in such games. Fortunately for Baldwin, the core of the team is still made up of talented players that Jeter, Boudreau and company recruited. |
|
|
|
Post by steveisback on Aug 24, 2017 13:40:41 GMT -6
MIssing the point....what he was getting it is when we lose to UW vs besting them in Rob's last year...it will be another way to say na na na na na
|
|
|
|
Post by FTA1982 on Aug 24, 2017 14:42:06 GMT -6
Just like scoring 39 and losing by 30 in 2004-2005 was a great barometer how that season ended up. I don't know what Pearl's failures have to do with anything. Last time we played the Badgers at Madison we were fairly competitive, as I recall. (I doubt that our administrator recalls it; she was nowhere to be seen.) Actually, you should welcome a "one-game" barometer. There's always a chance. Obviously it would be idiotic to expect this team to actually beat high major programs like Iowa State or UW, especially on the road. We are years away from that -- and that's if everything goes well in the rebuilding process. But you want to see a team that is at least disciplined and competitive in such games. Fortunately for Baldwin, the core of the team is still made up of talented players that Jeter, Boudreau and company recruited. I could rehash plenty of Jeter failures, but I could careless as he hasn't been our coach since March 2016. |
|
|
|
Post by BBFran on Aug 24, 2017 15:02:59 GMT -6
Steve, I merely want to understand what the standards are against which we should measure the progress of the program since March 2015. Our administrator listed the standards she expected in justifying Jeter's firing. Of course, she has applied those standards to no one else in the department. So it seems those are not the real standards. At least not her real standards. Those were what other people might call lies -- duplicitous, post-facto justification for a decision that apparently had other motivation.
So what are the standards for our program? How can we define success or progress? For years people complained that we did not beat any high major teams. Then we did. Then our administrator fired the coach. But now it doesn't matter whether we beat such teams? Or even whether we can? So I guess that standard's out too?
So how do we measure the progress of the program? Fan interest? Attendance? Twenty win seasons? Presumably the program needs, within the next couple years, to exceed by some definable, legitimate and rational measure the achievements under Jeter. Otherwise it should be obvious that this deconstruction of the program was all a terrible error. A mid-major program can't risk a half-decade or more on an administrator's ill-considered whim.
And to be clear, this isn't about Baldwin. Our administrator set this all in motion; she owns this. So let's be clear -- it's important to establish the standards so that we can measure our administrator. And reward or correct as necessary.
So what are the standards?
By the way, I'm fine with applying the standards she claimed. As long as they are applied to her, beginning now.
|
|
|
|
Post by steveisback on Aug 24, 2017 16:10:08 GMT -6
Hi Fran, See where you are coming from and do not disagree with any of the above. As far as holding the "she wolf of the SS" accountable, aka Amanda Braun well....good luck, Like you said she applied a double standard to both herself and other areas of the program vs mens basketball. She should be held accountable by overall dept performance in academic compliance, recruiting compliance, financial performance, attendance, fund raising , dept satisfaction and turnover etc... Regarding the mens basketball program and she is duplicitous so have no illusions here is what I think fwiw... <Finishing in top 3 in conference 4 of 5 years on rolling basis <Winning one or more HL tourneys in that span and thus NCAA bid <Increase in fan interest(attendance) <Fund Raising <Academic and Recruiting compliance. <Community/alumni relations ie, minimizing reputational risk to university...(tongue in cheek here) |
|
|
|
Post by MKEPanthers45 on Aug 24, 2017 16:56:07 GMT -6
What's the big deal about FIU? It's not like we were world beaters last season. Looks like this year we have some winnable games and some decent opponents. Seems alright to me. I guess we are above hosting Conference USA schools now??? |
|
|
|
Post by ghostofdylan on Aug 24, 2017 17:03:19 GMT -6
Not to be snarky at all, but I would wager that most potential ticket-buyers (and game-goers, period) have no knowledge that FIU is in C-USA ... nor care.
In other words, the reality is that FIU isn't an attractive opponent and neither is Elon College, which plays in a home gym that seats 1,500. I'm just being real.
And you hit on THE problem with our program in its present state: we're NOT better than an also-ran C-USA school.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pantherholic on Aug 24, 2017 17:34:59 GMT -6
No one likes home games against non-D1 teams but I don't really take any solace in the fact it's a D2 school instead of D3. It's not like when Jeter scheduled Judson people said, "Well at least they're in the NAIA!"
|
|
|
|
Post by BBFran on Aug 24, 2017 17:40:37 GMT -6
CUSA? Seriously? You realize that that conference is literally worse than the Horizon and has been for years, right? I just checked kenpom and 2013 was the last time CUSA ranked ahead of the H-League.
And last year, FIU was the 13th worst team in 14 team CUSA.
So yeah, we got a home game against FIU. Yay.
Western Michigan (horrifying memories aside) is a decent home game. FIU might as well be CSP.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pantherholic on Aug 24, 2017 17:53:08 GMT -6
(Btw, what do you think the chances are that we will ever see another home game against Wisconsin while the current admin is in place? I put it somewhere between zero and Barry Alvarez rolling on the floor laughing.) Gard said last year that the days of road games against lower competition is over. If mid or low majors want to play them, it'll only be in Madison. But as dylan noted, some of us can't help but remember all the complaining about the schedules under Jeter -- which were at least as good as this one and usually much better. So was it the schedules, or just Jeter derangement syndrome? The answer is pretty obvious. The irony of this is you naturally rushed to Jeter's aide citing "It's the way the sport has become". Well, the struggles of scheduling haven't changed and now that Rob's gone, accountability on the coaching staff left too since everything's Amanda's fault. Nothing was Koonce's, Geiger's, or anyone else's fault for the schedules but NOW it's all on her. So is this "Braun derangement syndrome"? The answer is pretty obvious. |
|
