Ben Johnson Reasonable Expectations

[Bob_Loblaw]

Watching Arkansas and Iowa State play in the tournament has gotten me thinking about a question that I think will be really hard to answer in regards to Ben Johnson because of COVID, transfer portal and the state of the program he inherited.

I am in the camp that it isn't wise to judge him over the results of this year. He walked into a uniquely difficult position due to COVID year mixed with transfer portal and the ramifications of those departures will probably ripple for a couple of years. I'm not making excuses for him but I also don't want to move on from a coach prematurely over something completely outside of his control. I also believe that excitement can be generated around a program before it shows up in the W/L department (Fleck's 6-6 2018 team showed some of that).

So here is where I stand on when we should realistically be expecting results (W/L column) from Ben Johnson.

Year 1: All I cared about was the system and recruiting. For me, I liked the way we played and I'm pumped up about the recruits we have coming in.
Year 2: I expect recruiting to keep progressing forward. I expect much better portal players and if we finish lower than 10th in the Big 10, Ben Johnson's seat should increase a couple degrees (maybe luke warm).
Year 3: If we finish lower than 10th, Ben Johnson's seat should be really warm/hot.
Year 4: If we are bad again, he should be fired. If we are improved, but don't make the tourney, his seat should be warm.
Year 5: Tournament or bust.

If he makes the tournament or finishes over .500 in the Big 10 in any of the first years, that throws this all out and we'd be starting with a new set of expectations.

Is this fair? Is it "too fair"? How do yours differ?

 

[bga1]

Tournament or bust by year 3.There is no reason not to expect that- especially with the transfer market.

 

[SanDiegoGopherFan]

With the transfer portal, a good recruiter and coach can field a tournament team in year 1.

BJ didnt have a resume that excited the recruits he wanted last year.

Year 2 I expect a much better influx of portal players and for us to be at least in the NIT, if not a bubble NCAA team. This is given what he was able to do with essentially 2-3 B1G players this year.

 

[cheeseheadgophfan]

If he's not making a run at the tournament in year 3 and in it in year 4 he needs to be let go. That would make this current recruiting class sophomores and juniors. That's more than enough time with the transfer portal to field a tournament team.

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

Tournament or bust by year 3.There is no reason not to expect that- especially with the transfer market.

This is where I am at as well. If you're drawing comparisons to PJ Fleck, he inherited almost nothing on offense, and depleted DBs due to the prior scandal. Yet in year 3 they had the best season of any Gopher football team in over 50 years.

It's significantly harder to turn around a football program than it is a basketball program due to needing so many players to do it, and PJ did it without the transfer portal the way it is today.

Ben just needs to find 5 good starters and a couple of bench players to make the NCAA tournament. With the way the transfer portal is now, it needs to happen by the end of year 3.

 

[cjbfbp]

Year 1: All I cared about was the system and recruiting. For me, I liked the way we played and I'm pumped up about the recruits we have coming in.
Year 2: I expect recruiting to keep progressing forward. I expect much better portal players and if we finish lower than 10th in the Big 10, Ben Johnson's seat should increase a couple degrees (maybe luke warm).
Year 3: If we finish lower than 10th, Ben Johnson's seat should be really warm/hot.
Year 4: If we are bad again, he should be fired. If we are improved, but don't make the tourney, his seat should be warm.
Year 5: Tournament or bust.

Is this fair? Is it "too fair"? How do yours differ?

I think it's quite fair and probably reflective of reality when thinking about the conditions of his minimum tenure here.

He probably is guaranteed at least four years unless Years 2&3 are as bad or worse than this one but, yes, four straight losing years should require termination. If he did something like make the NIT next year, that probably would guarantee him at least five years.

"Year 2: I expect recruiting to keep progressing forward. I expect much better portal players and if we finish lower than 10th in the Big 10, Ben Johnson's seat should increase a couple degrees (maybe luke warm)."

I think the top five players he got from the portal in 2021 (Battle, Willis, Stephens, Loewe, and Sutherlin) were either good or good enough to be rotational supporting players. The problem was that the other three transfers stunk, the freshman recruit was of little help, and Curry at this point in his career was more suitable for backup minutes. I would be mildly surprised if he got any transfer commits that were as prolific at scoring as Battle and Willis. I think the main thing is not to get any bad players from the portal in 2022. Depending upon whether he decides to fill all 13 scholarship spots (I think he should but he may not), he only needs 3 or 4. If only 3, then get a couple of point/combo guards of good quality (at least one who can be projected to average double figures) and a decent quality front court player who can rebound the ball.

I agree with your Year 2 target. Get us out of Weakling Wednesday in the Big Ten tournament. If Ben manages to compile a 17-14 regular season record or something similar next season that will be good progress.

 

[MNVCGUY]

Watching Arkansas and Iowa State play in the tournament has gotten me thinking about a question that I think will be really hard to answer in regards to Ben Johnson because of COVID, transfer portal and the state of the program he inherited.

I am in the camp that it isn't wise to judge him over the results of this year. He walked into a uniquely difficult position due to COVID year mixed with transfer portal and the ramifications of those departures will probably ripple for a couple of years. I'm not making excuses for him but I also don't want to move on from a coach prematurely over something completely outside of his control. I also believe that excitement can be generated around a program before it shows up in the W/L department (Fleck's 6-6 2018 team showed some of that).

So here is where I stand on when we should realistically be expecting results (W/L column) from Ben Johnson.

Year 1: All I cared about was the system and recruiting. For me, I liked the way we played and I'm pumped up about the recruits we have coming in.
Year 2: I expect recruiting to keep progressing forward. I expect much better portal players and if we finish lower than 10th in the Big 10, Ben Johnson's seat should increase a couple degrees (maybe luke warm).
Year 3: If we finish lower than 10th, Ben Johnson's seat should be really warm/hot.
Year 4: If we are bad again, he should be fired. If we are improved, but don't make the tourney, his seat should be warm.
Year 5: Tournament or bust.

If he makes the tournament or finishes over .500 in the Big 10 in any of the first years, that throws this all out and we'd be starting with a new set of expectations.

Is this fair? Is it "too fair"? How do yours differ?

That feels like a pretty good bare minimum way of laying it out. Obviously we all want to see a tournament appearance before year 5 but the only way I see Coyle pulling the plug before that would be a complete disaster on and off the court.

 

[MNVCGUY]

Tournament or bust by year 3.There is no reason not to expect that- especially with the transfer market.

Totally agree that with the portal the possibility of a quicker turnaround is possible but I am always hesitant to put ultimatums on anything coaching related because there are so many x factors that come into it.

And the only way you pull the plug on a coach after just 3 years is if things are a disaster on and off the court and the program is clearly floundering under that coach.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

I like Bob's timeline.

I think it is fair - considering all of the variables now in college sports.

Sure, a team can turn around in a hurry by bringing in exceptional talent. But again, this is the MN Gopher Men's basketball program we are talking about. A program that, in the last 25 years, has had 3 seasons with a winning record in B1G play and 3 seasons with a .500 record - meaning 19 of 25 years with a losing record in B1G play.

Considering that history, I think you have to be realistic.

A top-50 player like Holmgren or Suggs is not coming to MN. They are going to one of the "1-and-done" factories where they have a legitimate chance to win a nat'l title before jumping to the NBA.

Ben Johnson is going to have to build this program with solid - but not exceptional - players.

I could see the Gophs being an NIT team next year IF everything breaks right, and making the NCAA tournament as a low seed in year 3.

But, if that doesn't happen, I am not going to be screaming for Johnson to be fired.

 

[leib0039]

That feels like a pretty good bare minimum way of laying it out. Obviously we all want to see a tournament appearance before year 5 but the only way I see Coyle pulling the plug before that would be a complete disaster on and off the court.

Whalen hasn't made the tourney in 4 years (sniffed it year 1 but not a great team) and she just got an extension. I generally like the "home town" hire with ties, my only concern with those is generally that they are given a longer leash. This isnt a MN specific thing, its everywhere, when the "strong ties to the program" hires dont work, they end up dragging the program down 2-3 years longer than anyone else would have because you feel bad firing them. Not saying Ben is that guy, its just an general observation and my thought that Ben is essentially guaranteed 5 years unless we finish DFL 3 of those years. You know next year even if we finished say 13th it would be "well its improvement!".

However, like most have said above, turning around a bball program is in theory significantly easier than football. You basically need to find 7-8 kids and you are at least competitive. ISU is obviously the easiest comparison but look at say St Peters, Holloways first year 10-22, then 18-12 14-11 21-11. That is the type of expectation I would have for most coaches. Year 1 is tough, but there needs to be steady improvement (and by improvement I mean WINS, not well we played tough). I wouldn't be happy per se but if we were playing on weakling Wednesday next year I could maybe buy it, if we are still there year 3 that would signal to me that Ben is the wrong guy. Going back to my original point, the only exception to that would be if in say year 4 he had a Whalen type class coming in with 4 top 100 kids and a few in the top 40.

 

[Spaulding!No!]

The responses are all sound. I lack the bball knowledge of everyone here but the recruiting and the season had a Pitino look and feel.

 

[Dakota2]

Watching Arkansas and Iowa State play in the tournament has gotten me thinking about a question that I think will be really hard to answer in regards to Ben Johnson because of COVID, transfer portal and the state of the program he inherited.

I am in the camp that it isn't wise to judge him over the results of this year. He walked into a uniquely difficult position due to COVID year mixed with transfer portal and the ramifications of those departures will probably ripple for a couple of years. I'm not making excuses for him but I also don't want to move on from a coach prematurely over something completely outside of his control. I also believe that excitement can be generated around a program before it shows up in the W/L department (Fleck's 6-6 2018 team showed some of that).

So here is where I stand on when we should realistically be expecting results (W/L column) from Ben Johnson.

Year 1: All I cared about was the system and recruiting. For me, I liked the way we played and I'm pumped up about the recruits we have coming in.
Year 2: I expect recruiting to keep progressing forward. I expect much better portal players and if we finish lower than 10th in the Big 10, Ben Johnson's seat should increase a couple degrees (maybe luke warm).
Year 3: If we finish lower than 10th, Ben Johnson's seat should be really warm/hot.
Year 4: If we are bad again, he should be fired. If we are improved, but don't make the tourney, his seat should be warm.
Year 5: Tournament or bust.

If he makes the tournament or finishes over .500 in the Big 10 in any of the first years, that throws this all out and we'd be starting with a new set of expectations.

Is this fair? Is it "too fair"? How do yours differ?

These are reasonable and fair expectations. Personally, I believe he will somewhat exceed your timeline.

However, I think there is another way to look at year one. Your premise is that Covid and all the departures make it difficult to make judgments on this past season. My view is that he can and should be judged, not on the situation he stepped into, but how he handled that very poor hand he was dealt.

I am not looking at Year 1 based on record, placement in the conference (bottom), or even failure to have depth and a bench beyond Sutherlin. The question I ask is, "Could any other coach, experienced or not, have done better in this situation? My answer is, few could have done as well.

I don't buy the argument that he didn't get enough good portal players, and thus, the lack of depth. The fact is he got three very good portal players in Willis, Battle, and Fox. That Fox didn't play does not take away the fact we got him and not any of the other 40-50 schools who wanted him could.

He also got three quite decent portal players in Stephens, Loewe, and Sutherlin. Had Ihnen and Fox played, we would not be so critical of Daniels as a big-body ninth man on the bench.

By reasonable standards, Ben had a very good portal class his first year and, even with something solid to show we might not get anyone as good as Battle or Willis to transfer in this year. That will be offset by Ihnen and Fox returning and some help from a good freshman class. I am looking for three or four good, not great, transfers to make a solid contribution.

I did not expect four Big wins or to play a few ranked teams close to the end. I did not expect to go undefeated in non-conference.

My expectations for the next four years are a bit higher than your (reasonable) take, mainly because he did better the first year than could have been reasonably expected.

 

[howeda7]

We should at least be a bubble NCAA/NIT team next year. I want to have anxiety on Selection Sunday. By year 3, enough of a lock for no anxiety.

 

[MaxyJR1]

I want to see a season of no major injuries and a full roster of recruits/transfers that he wants in his program. He was down 1-2 starters before the season even started this last season in Fox and Ihnen.
I'd give him a full 5 years to grow as it's his first job. If after 3 years Coyle doesn't think it will work and he has the funds to hit a HR hire, by all means he should consider doing it at any time after year 3.

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

We should at least be a bubble NCAA/NIT team next year. I want to have anxiety on Selection Sunday. By year 3, enough of a lock for no anxiety.

I also agree with this. Our last two failed head coaches did this in their first year, with Pitino winning the NIT in year 1.

 

[Lion King]

Watching Arkansas and Iowa State play in the tournament has gotten me thinking about a question that I think will be really hard to answer in regards to Ben Johnson because of COVID, transfer portal and the state of the program he inherited.

I am in the camp that it isn't wise to judge him over the results of this year. He walked into a uniquely difficult position due to COVID year mixed with transfer portal and the ramifications of those departures will probably ripple for a couple of years. I'm not making excuses for him but I also don't want to move on from a coach prematurely over something completely outside of his control. I also believe that excitement can be generated around a program before it shows up in the W/L department (Fleck's 6-6 2018 team showed some of that).

So here is where I stand on when we should realistically be expecting results (W/L column) from Ben Johnson.

Year 1: All I cared about was the system and recruiting. For me, I liked the way we played and I'm pumped up about the recruits we have coming in.
Year 2: I expect recruiting to keep progressing forward. I expect much better portal players and if we finish lower than 10th in the Big 10, Ben Johnson's seat should increase a couple degrees (maybe luke warm).
Year 3: If we finish lower than 10th, Ben Johnson's seat should be really warm/hot.
Year 4: If we are bad again, he should be fired. If we are improved, but don't make the tourney, his seat should be warm.
Year 5: Tournament or bust.

If he makes the tournament or finishes over .500 in the Big 10 in any of the first years, that throws this all out and we'd be starting with a new set of expectations.

Is this fair? Is it "too fair"? How do yours differ?

 

[Lion King]

Year 4 and beyond ,stay ahead of Northwestern,Nebraska,Penn State and Rutgers,that is my goal.
When your a bottom feeder for as long as we have been its nearly impossible to move up,without CHEATING. Recruits just don't want to play for a losing program, AND if they do,they will probably leave in a year or so.
An occasional NIT BID WOULD BE NICE.

 

[gopherguy15]

I'm getting a little annoyed of some people on this board having the mindset that the transfer portal should always work. Newsflash, it doesn't. For every Eric Musselman and Nate Oats, there's 40 other coaches that dipped into the portal and couldn't get it to work. Even Texas, which had amazing transfer talent, struggled for large chunks this year, never fully got it to click, and went from a top 5 preseason ranking to losing in the 2nd round, and not by upset. Do not compare the Gophers right now to blue bloods or yearly contenders getting elite transfer talent. The Iowa State situation is far from the norm.

 

[leib0039]

Different situations in both I understand but I hear a lot of "well we had injuries to 2 guys!" So did Houston, lost their 2 best players early in the season, they turned out ok! Texas tech, lost a coach and had I believe 5 transfers play huge roles in coaches yr 1, they turned out ok! Again they are more established, im not saying we should have made the s16, but good programs and coaches overcome those hurdles.

 

[cjbfbp]

I also agree with this. Our last two failed head coaches did this in their first year, with Pitino winning the NIT in year 1.

In retrospect, I don't think it's fair to call Tubby a "failed" head coach and thereby place him into the same category of the other two most recent coaches.

Pitino was here for 8 years and he had three overall losing seasons including one of the worst in program history. He made a postseason tournament in only 3 of those 8 years and had an overall winning percentage of only .534. Monson was here for 7 full years and part of an 8th. He had two full year losing seasons, a partial one, and an overall winning percentage of .527. Monson and Pitino really had pretty similar tenures here.

Tubby was here for only 6 years and never had a losing season. He made a post-season tournament in 5 of those 6 years and had an overall winning percentage of .605 here. Tubby may have underachieved given his high stature when he arrived here but he wasn't a true failure.

 

[cjbfbp]

I'm getting a little annoyed of some people on this board having the mindset that the transfer portal should always work. Newsflash, it doesn't.

And I get annoyed by people who precede a declaration by the word "Newsflash."

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

I'm getting a little annoyed of some people on this board having the mindset that the transfer portal should always work. Newsflash, it doesn't. For every Eric Musselman and Nate Oats, there's 40 other coaches that dipped into the portal and couldn't get it to work. Even Texas, which had amazing transfer talent, struggled for large chunks this year, never fully got it to click, and went from a top 5 preseason ranking to losing in the 2nd round, and not by upset. Do not compare the Gophers right now to blue bloods or yearly contenders getting elite transfer talent. The Iowa State situation is far from the norm.

I mean, nothing always works out. There are winners and losers. This is true in games, portal, recruiting, etc. A coach is still responsible for getting your program on the right side of that split.

 

[Unregistered User]

And I get annoyed by people who precede a declaration by the word "Newsflash."

Newsflash, I am not annoyed by that.

 

[cjbfbp]

Different situations in both I understand but I hear a lot of "well we had injuries to 2 guys!" So did Houston, lost their 2 best players early in the season, they turned out ok! Texas tech, lost a coach and had I believe 5 transfers play huge roles in coaches yr 1, they turned out ok! Again they are more established, im not saying we should have made the s16, but good programs and coaches overcome those hurdles.

By his own admission shortly after he was hired, Ben wasn't concerned about recruiting a full 13 scholarship roster to the best of his ability early last season. That really hurt him when two players when down, we had a short roster, and those last transfers appeared to be after-thoughts.

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

In retrospect, I don't think it's fair to call Tubby a "failed" head coach and thereby place him into the same category of the other two most recent coaches.

Pitino was here for 8 years and he had three overall losing seasons including one of the worst in program history. He made a postseason tournament in only 3 of those 8 years and had an overall winning percentage of only .534. Monson was here for 7 full years and part of an 8th. He had two full year losing seasons, a partial one, and an overall winning percentage of .527. Monson and Pitino really had pretty similar tenures here.

Tubby was here for only 6 years and never had a losing season. He made a post-season tournament in 5 of those 6 years and had an overall winning percentage of .605 here. Tubby may have underachieved given his high stature when he arrived here but he wasn't a true failure.

Tubby's overall record looks good, but he never had a winning season in the B1G and was 46–62 (.426) in conference. Pitino and Monson both had one of those. Overall I agree that Tubby was better than those two, but all three failed because all three were fired.

 

[cjbfbp]

Tubby's overall record looks good, but he never had a winning season in the B1G and was 46–62 (.426) in conference. Pitino and Monson both had one of those. Overall I agree that Tubby was better than those two, but all three failed because all three were fired.

He was fired by a sexual harassing idiot who also gave his successor an undeserved extension that made him too expensive to fire for at least his first five years. I think the university had the right to move on from Tubby but that didn't make him a failure in the true sense of the word.

 

[MennoSota]

History shows us that winning at Minnesota takes time (and often cheating). Clem is the last coach to have the program competitive. That was 20 years ago.

It is unrealistic to think a first time head coach is going to leap frog the coaching pedigree in the B1G and move quickly to the top. Whether we like it or not, UMN is not a dream destination for any basketball player who wasn't raised in maroon and gold. This program will only move up through a sustained process that is going to take time. No shortcuts for this program. This is not what people here will want to believe or hear, but I think it's the only way to go with this particular program (unless you want to cheat again).
Ben Johnson has a plan for process and he has the patient personality to see the process to fulfillment. He is a rare coach in this regard. Pitino was always looking for a quick fix and either hit or missed. Johnson is going to be particular regarding who he wants and how it fits to plan. I am excited to see this plan worked out to completion. That completion is likely a 5 year plan at minimum. (Sorry to all you impatient folks.)

 

[gopherguy15]

And I get annoyed by people who precede a declaration by the word "Newsflash."

Feeling better now after getting that out?

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

He was fired by a sexual harassing idiot who also gave his successor an undeserved extension that made him too expensive to fire for at least his first five years. I think the university had the right to move on from Tubby but that didn't make him a failure in the true sense of the word.

It doesn't matter who fired him or what happened after him, he had a terrible B1G record and his last two recruiting classes were beyond bad. He was a failure and deserved to be fired.

 

[Fleckoff]

Whalen hasn't made the tourney in 4 years (sniffed it year 1 but not a great team) and she just got an extension. I generally like the "home town" hire with ties, my only concern with those is generally that they are given a longer leash. This isnt a MN specific thing, its everywhere, when the "strong ties to the program" hires dont work, they end up dragging the program down 2-3 years longer than anyone else would have because you feel bad firing them. Not saying Ben is that guy, its just an general observation and my thought that Ben is essentially guaranteed 5 years unless we finish DFL 3 of those years. You know next year even if we finished say 13th it would be "well its improvement!".

However, like most have said above, turning around a bball program is in theory significantly easier than football. You basically need to find 7-8 kids and you are at least competitive. ISU is obviously the easiest comparison but look at say St Peters, Holloways first year 10-22, then 18-12 14-11 21-11. That is the type of expectation I would have for most coaches. Year 1 is tough, but there needs to be steady improvement (and by improvement I mean WINS, not well we played tough). I wouldn't be happy per se but if we were playing on weakling Wednesday next year I could maybe buy it, if we are still there year 3 that would signal to me that Ben is the wrong guy. Going back to my original point, the only exception to that would be if in say year 4 he had a Whalen type class coming in with 4 top 100 kids and a few in the top 40.

Whalen extension is the type of extension you get for recruiting purposes, the year before you get fired. Devil's in the details, very similar to the one's Brewster and Pitino got before they were greased