|
Post by lmills72 on May 7, 2021 18:49:19 GMT -6
The evidence is that all other things equal, those programs in any conference which are highly successful seem to be spending more over time to be successful over time than their "unsuccessful and mediocre" peers.
That is true across college basketball and football programs.
So this also explains why we haven't been able to win a MAC championship in football.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 7, 2021 20:30:18 GMT -6
The evidence is that all other things equal, those programs in any conference which are highly successful seem to be spending more over time to be successful over time than their "unsuccessful and mediocre" peers.
That is true across college basketball and football programs.
So this also explains why we haven't been able to win a MAC championship in football. We have done well this last year, and I am optimistic about this year in FB.
We are spending a lot there. But looking back a few years I don't think that over time part of the equation says we are on top of the world yet in FB.
I'd say the same thing, if we want to be at the top consistently in FB we need to spend as much as others and more than the average program. Part of BSU's fall from glory was looking at BB as a profit center and allowing us to allocate more money while losing more in FB to keep up in the arms race. Losing big money on FB seems to be the rule for the MAC, where even the winners in FB are losers.
It is going to be a real struggle to outperform the MAc powers in FB over time without pouring more money into it. Our hope there is everyone else has to come down to our level. We are not going to be expanding our athletic budget.
I'd rather see the BB program get investment, we can increase revenue and make money or come closer to breaking even there. The BSU history is to hold the line and forego investment in BB to allow FB to survive. It is not clear to me we should continue that.
|
|
|
Post by lmills72 on May 8, 2021 7:41:44 GMT -6
You always argue like fans on these boards want us to be the New York Yankees.
People are just asking for a MAC championship (for a team of that caliber) every decade or so. Football has proven BSU can achieve that without being the most well-funded program in the conference.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 8, 2021 8:52:14 GMT -6
You always argue like fans on these boards want us to be the New York Yankees. People are just asking for a MAC championship (for a team of that caliber) every decade or so. Football has proven BSU can achieve that without being the most well-funded program in the conference. That seems reasonable to expect. No disagreement about the goal.
I am not sure everyone here is quite as reasonable as you represent, though. I am not. In fact I think we all really want more than that. I think most of us want to be consistently in the top 3 or 4 teams with a trip to the final game every 3 or 4 years and winning our fair share. That might lead to 2 or 3 times in the NCAA.
Here's the rub, saying it is easy to do and we SHOULD have 1 championship in 10 years runs up against another reality. Excepting rare case (maybe like this last year in FB) it doesn't usually happen that way. MOST teams in the MAC do not achieve that "fair share" goal. Look back in 10 years, have even 1/2 of the teams accomplished that? Above somewhere is a post noting only 7 teams in 20 years have had a BB championship.
That's why we want more. You need to be consistently in the top 3 or 4 to have that 2 or 3 year window where it is likely to have the chance to win.
The argument I am making is that if we do want more than the occasional success, we should expect to fund our program in that top 3 or 4 level.
I want that. When the money isn't there to do it, I won't beat up the administration.
Here is reality.
1. The response here is often "BUT they should seek and allocate donor money to do it" I am not sure that is true, even though I want it that way.
2. The other response which I quarrel with most vociferously is that "We do NOT need money to succeed, just very risky or very clever management." I argue with that on two counts. Unlikely success unless we spend in the top 3 or 4, and administration will not take that kind of risk, and I am not sure they should. There is downside.
And finally, we have the Sherman Plan. Which is totally unrealistic...
|
|
|
Post by sweep on May 8, 2021 9:09:33 GMT -6
You always argue like fans on these boards want us to be the New York Yankees. People are just asking for a MAC championship (for a team of that caliber) every decade or so. Football has proven BSU can achieve that without being the most well-funded program in the conference.
Here's the rub, saying it is easy to do ......................
Of course, no one ever said that.
|
|
|
Post by cardfan on May 8, 2021 9:38:10 GMT -6
I just want us at least competing regularly. Dominating like we used to is not realistic anymore. Not with the way players move around. But I’d like to at least feel like we have a chance most of the time and with Whitford that’s just not a thing.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 8, 2021 10:26:00 GMT -6
Here's the rub, saying it is easy to do ......................
Of course, no one ever said that. It's not. Especially without good budget. When administration acts reasonably and fails I am not going to beat them up. We can disagree at times whether something is reasonable. And we have a history of poor decisions we agree. I think with our funding we live in a reality where most choices start out second best, and can't beat administration too much up when those second best choices don't work. I'll support players and coaches, will do what I can to make things work, raise money, buy tickets, so on. I see little plus in just complaining. Except venting. Understandable as that is.
|
|
|
Post by sweep on May 8, 2021 11:21:14 GMT -6
Of course, no one ever said that. When administration acts reasonably and fails I am not going to beat them up. So in 00 land two decades of failure results from "reasonable" stewardship. Go smoke some more dope.
|
|
|
Post by JacksonStreetElite on May 8, 2021 11:21:14 GMT -6
Here's the rub, saying it is easy to do ......................
Of course, no one ever said that. Responding to what was actually said is WAY harder than responding to what you wish they had said.
|
|
|
Post by lmills72 on May 9, 2021 8:47:23 GMT -6
You need to be consistently in the top 3 or 4 to have that 2 or 3 year window where it is likely to have the chance to win. You're just wrong, and it's amazing that you think that when the facts are there to prove you wrong.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 9, 2021 8:54:31 GMT -6
You need to be consistently in the top 3 or 4 to have that 2 or 3 year window where it is likely to have the chance to win. You're just wrong, and it's amazing that you think that when the facts are there to prove you wrong. MAC champs rarely come out of left field. If you are regularly top 3 or 4 you win more often, have better odds. What facts are you citing to show that is wrong? I'm not saying it can't happen occasionally, but all the talk here is about rather regular championships not one every 10 years. We better upgrade to top tier to achieve that.
|
|
|
Post by lmills72 on May 9, 2021 9:03:56 GMT -6
Football did not have a winning season under Neu before it won last year.
Football had one winning season under Hoke before running the table during the regular season and being ranked as high as 12th in the nation.
|
|
|
Post by williamtsherman on May 9, 2021 9:50:21 GMT -6
Not clear to me how anyone can argue for some marginal increase in funding, and at the same time consistently support the continued employment of coaches who clearly demonstrate an inability to create a championship level program.
The correlation between being an expensive hire and being a successful hire is not that strong. There are many, many, many cases of coaches who were hired on modest initial salaries that succeed hugely, and many other cases of coaches who were the subject of bidding wars taking their programs nowhere in particular. In any case, the money is never going to be there to buy such a well-credentialed coach that success is practically assured. Spending, say, an additional 30% may be somewhat conceivable, but this will only budge the probability of success upwards a small amount.
On the other hand, making excuses and continuing to employ underperforming coaches is as close to a guarantee of failure as it is possible to get in the world of sports. There is a rock solid correlation between coaching failure in the first two or three years and continued failure. I know of exactly two exceptions to this rule out of hundreds of cases.
So, posts claiming that we can't expect success until we have one of the most expensive hires in the MAC, following a long succession of posts making the lamest excuses and trying to polish up the turd programs of Taylor, and now Whitford do nothing but demonstrate an especially stubborn stupidity.
|
|
|
Post by sweep on May 9, 2021 9:57:15 GMT -6
You're just wrong, and it's amazing that you think that when the facts are there to prove you wrong. MAC champs rarely come out of left field. If you are regularly top 3 or 4 you win more often, have better odds. What facts are you citing to show that is wrong? I'm not saying it can't happen occasionally, but all the talk here is about rather regular championships not one every 10 years. We better upgrade to top tier to achieve that. Ohio had 3 losing MAC seasons in a row prior to turning it around this year and going to the tourney. What are you talking about ?
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on May 9, 2021 10:36:00 GMT -6
MAC champs rarely come out of left field. If you are regularly top 3 or 4 you win more often, have better odds. What facts are you citing to show that is wrong? I'm not saying it can't happen occasionally, but all the talk here is about rather regular championships not one every 10 years. We better upgrade to top tier to achieve that. Ohio had 3 losing MAC seasons in a row prior to turning it around this year and going to the tourney. What are you talking about ? C'mon, over time Ohio has not exactly been bad. 3 or 4 trips to the NCAA, a regular winner in the last 10 years. A 3 year drought, yes but they seem to be back on track, not following the BSU model of saying we can win on the cheap and support the other sports. BTW, look back at Buffalo, Akron over the last 10 years. What is their record? Number of championships? Relative commitment to BB funding?
On the flip side look at the 6 programs than have not won in 20 years in trying to argue with the point. How many of those programs were well funded ones who make investment and failed? Any of them consistently in the top 4 in the MAC and failing to compete for a championship?
I stand by my generalization that the top tier programs are well funded and regularly compete for championships with higher odds of success, that is a laughably easy argument you are contesting.
If we want championships we need to be serious about it and not whine about not winning when we are not making a top tier commitment. And as long as we are not making a commitment, we should not expect to do well. Hope for it, maybe, but it's not a birth right. Not likely.
|
|