|
Post by 00hmh on Dec 31, 2018 14:05:45 GMT -6
I maintain the position given ALL things considered (FACILITIES, ACADEMICS, LOCALE, CONFERENCE AFFILIATION, I could go on but will not) Ball State University's expectations should be much higher than this pitiful level that we at now. At one time (not long ago) the MAC was a great Mid-Major conference, and BSU was a player. At the present, the conference is terrible and for us not to be in the hunt is worse. If we can't sign two or three legit D-1 players per year we need to look VERY CLOSELY WHY. Ball State has a lot going for itself and so should the basketball program. We should look long and hard why we have not been better in the last TWENTY YEARS. If the Einsteins on the BOT and the Athletic Department can't figure it out, tell them to contact a few on this site and I am sure they could get acceptable answer. You cite conference affiliation, etc as factor which say we should be "much higher." Yet we pay less than most MAC schools to support an athletic budget below MAC level and you call that conference "terrible." How is that outweighed? Our academics, facilities are good enough, but not really enough. No comparison with top conferences. Better maybe, but not "much better" than most mid majors. Our athletic budget is not better than most mid majors. That is for sure.
Locale? A plus? The locale is not very good in terms of drawing crowds, school population is dropping, where is the big plus there?
FACT is we do not compare in any of these four areas with power conference schools.
Yet to be "much higher" that is the level we would have to achieve on the court. Something is wrong with your logic on that part. That conference affiliation you list as a plus means we are forced to fund FB. That adds to the difficulty of the task. (Whether you want FB or not, we have to agree on that.)
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Dec 31, 2018 14:09:18 GMT -6
I maintain the position given ALL things considered (FACILITIES, ACADEMICS, LOCALE, CONFERENCE AFFILIATION, I could go on but will not) Ball State University's expectations should be much higher than this pitiful level that we at now.... I believe our goals and expectations are to compete at the top of the MAC, to regularly be in the top 100. Over the last 5 years we have climbed a steep hill to get there. You can say we failed to meet our goals those years, but that is a debate about how soon we could have expected to get the job done. I think given our investment we have done pretty well to do that. Frustrating to not get there quicker, I'd agree, but I am not sure we could do a lot better. Assume we want to be consistently somewhat higher than we are this year, ranked 60-80 instead of 80-100 where we are right now. If we do that, we will occasionally rise to 40-60. That's very good. About matching where our best period in history. Even then we were often enough 60-100. Our greatest teams over our best 2 decades were not consistently in the top 40, although they nosed into that rarified air during a relative few seasons, not often ending the year there. I can agree we are not where we want to be yet in terms of establishing a consistent record at the MAC top, but it seems to me we are on the threshhold of that and if we keep Whit or pay enough to replace him with a coach as good or better we can be where we want to be.
We have a roster which, assuming we can keep these players and get more at their level to replace them I just don't see us as needing to go "much higher."
Maybe you can quantify that "much higher" part? I don't get that.
.
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Dec 31, 2018 14:23:27 GMT -6
I maintain the position given ALL things considered (FACILITIES, ACADEMICS, LOCALE, CONFERENCE AFFILIATION, I could go on but will not) Ball State University's expectations should be much higher than this pitiful level that we at now.... I believe our goals and expectations are to compete at the top of the MAC, to regularly be in the top 100. Over the last 5 years we have climbed a steep hill to get there. You can say we failed to meet our goals those years, but that is a debate about how soon we could have expected to get the job done. I think given our investment we have done pretty well to do that. Frustrating to not get there quicker, I'd agree, but I am not sure we could do a lot better. Assume we want to be consistently somewhat higher than we are this year, ranked 60-80 instead of 80-100 where we are right now. If we do that, we will occasionally rise to 40-60. That's very good. About matching where our best period in history. Even then we were often enough 60-100. Our greatest teams over our best 2 decades were not consistently in the top 40, although they nosed into that rarified air during a relative few seasons, not often ending the year there. I can agree we are not where we want to be yet in terms of establishing a consistent record at the MAC top, but it seems to me we are on the threshhold of that and if we keep Whit or pay enough to replace him with a coach as good or better we can be where we want to be.
We have a roster which, assuming we can keep these players and get more at their level to replace them I just don't see us as needing to go "much higher."
Maybe you can quantify that "much higher" part? I don't get that.
. How about beating teams that finish the season in the Top 100. I think we have only done that twice since Whitford's arrival.
|
|
|
Post by bsu0 on Dec 31, 2018 14:23:50 GMT -6
Conference strength weak...easier to win. Locale...in the middle of the MAC...Easy for parents to drive to games...also a good position to recruit Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, and Illinois from. Attendance?...We have THOUSANDS that are within walking distance of Worthen and get in free. We are only 60 miles from Indy and FT. Wayne. Bloomington does not seem to have that problem. The point is, if we win, THEY will come. I stand by what I have written, we should be better...much better. ,
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Dec 31, 2018 14:27:51 GMT -6
I believe our goals and expectations are to compete at the top of the MAC, to regularly be in the top 100. Over the last 5 years we have climbed a steep hill to get there. You can say we failed to meet our goals those years, but that is a debate about how soon we could have expected to get the job done. I think given our investment we have done pretty well to do that. Frustrating to not get there quicker, I'd agree, but I am not sure we could do a lot better. Assume we want to be consistently somewhat higher than we are this year, ranked 60-80 instead of 80-100 where we are right now. If we do that, we will occasionally rise to 40-60. That's very good. About matching where our best period in history. Even then we were often enough 60-100. Our greatest teams over our best 2 decades were not consistently in the top 40, although they nosed into that rarified air during a relative few seasons, not often ending the year there. I can agree we are not where we want to be yet in terms of establishing a consistent record at the MAC top, but it seems to me we are on the threshhold of that and if we keep Whit or pay enough to replace him with a coach as good or better we can be where we want to be.
We have a roster which, assuming we can keep these players and get more at their level to replace them I just don't see us as needing to go "much higher."
Maybe you can quantify that "much higher" part? I don't get that.
. How about beating teams that finish the season in the Top 100. I think we have only done that twice since Whitford's arrival. I don't know. In years before we have some good victories. I think you are exaggerating.
We beat Buffalo and ND recently enough. This year, let's see.
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Dec 31, 2018 14:31:54 GMT -6
How about beating teams that finish the season in the Top 100. I think we have only done that twice since Whitford's arrival. I don't know. In years before we have some good victories. I think you are exaggerating.
We beat Buffalo and ND recently enough. This year, let's see. I think ND last season and Valpo in 15-16 are the only two.
|
|
|
Post by rgmillikan on Dec 31, 2018 15:40:53 GMT -6
If BSU only lost 3 more conference games(unlikely) and the MAC tourney loss was in finals to Buffalo I'd say that qualifies as a really good season given buffalo is an ncaa at large caliber team. You need to get to the post season to qualify as a really good year. 15-3 MAC record and a loss to Buffalo in theory would likely put BSU in NIT discussion. Right now they are in 90s in most measures nationally and that would bring them up a bit closer to 80. Btw I certainly dont think they will win 15 MAC games.
|
|
|
Post by thebsukid on Dec 31, 2018 21:47:21 GMT -6
We are much better in basketball under Whit than we are in football..no contest!
Same distance in football vs basketball from everywhere
|
|
|
Post by bsu0 on Jan 1, 2019 11:57:05 GMT -6
One just cannot compare football and basketball. It is like comparing nails with staples. impossible IMHO.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2019 20:56:26 GMT -6
Thought I’d revisit the histogram.
After 4 games.....
......We already have ourselves one sure loser, one needing to run the table and seven hoping we pull a miracle at Buffalo.
|
|
|
Post by CallingBS on Jan 16, 2019 10:57:35 GMT -6
Thought I’d revisit the histogram. After 4 games..... ......We already have ourselves one sure loser, one needing to run the table and seven hoping we pull a miracle at Buffalo. My 10-8 is likely very optimistic at this point.
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Jan 16, 2019 14:08:56 GMT -6
Looks like we were all drinking the Kool Aid with no one predicting a losing record in the MAC which now seems most likely.
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Jan 16, 2019 17:31:47 GMT -6
Looks like we were all drinking the Kool Aid with no one predicting a losing record in the MAC which now seems most likely. We will likely still have a winning record, but possibly not a bye and home court advantage.
|
|
|
Post by rgmillikan on Jan 17, 2019 3:35:54 GMT -6
Looks like we were all drinking the Kool Aid with no one predicting a losing record in the MAC which now seems most likely. We will likely still have a winning record, but possibly not a bye and home court advantage. I tend to agree . They'll probably go on a winning streak after Buffalo game and struggle with last 4 regular season games. Losing the bye would suck since I believe BSU has lost their last 9 MAC tournament games at first round sites.
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on Jan 17, 2019 7:54:42 GMT -6
One just cannot compare football and basketball. It is like comparing nails with staples. impossible IMHO.
Both nails and staples are used to fasten things together.
Boom.
|
|