If Coyle doesn’t fire Pitino...

[justthefacts]

Two things.

1. Gonzaga has been to 21 consecutive NCAA tournaments, 20 of those under Few. Gonzaga is one of only 4 Division programs that has played in every NCAA Tournament since 2000. The others are Duke, Kansas, and Michigan State. If anyone thinks that is easy or doesn't require coaching/recruiting chops, no matter conference affiliation, you are beyond help.

2. People close to the Gonzaga program would tell you it was previous Zags coach Dan Fitzgerald who set the table for Dan Monson, not Dan Monson setting the table for Mark Few. And I think there's pretty good evidence now (20-years worth) with Monson here & @ Long Beach State and with Few @ Gonzaga of who the key cog was behind the budding Gonzaga program/machine.

Ya, Mark Few is overrated. Great argument!

A little more context on Gonzaga's 21 straight tournaments. Not only are they 1 of 4 schools to have been 20 straight times, they're 1 of only 10 to go even 5 straight times. That number becomes 9 this year as UNC (!) won't make it. There are only 20 schools that are currently riding 3 year streaks. 3 years! And a coach who had been to 14 in a row deserved criticism apparently.

 

[cjbfbp]

If Oturu returns, and he might as his draft status seems to be dropping, and Curry can finally play, we'll have a nice lineup next year.

Well, if those possibilities do happen, I'd like those two players to have the opportunity to play for a good collegiate coach in their last year with the program.

 

[BarnBurner]

Two things.

1. Gonzaga has been to 21 consecutive NCAA tournaments, 20 of those under Few. Gonzaga is one of only 4 Division programs that has played in every NCAA Tournament since 2000. The others are Duke, Kansas, and Michigan State. If anyone thinks that is easy or doesn't require coaching/recruiting chops, no matter conference affiliation, you are beyond help.

2. People close to the Gonzaga program would tell you it was previous Zags coach Dan Fitzgerald who set the table for Dan Monson, not Dan Monson setting the table for Mark Few. And I think there's pretty good evidence now (20-years worth) with Monson here & @ Long Beach State and with Few @ Gonzaga of who the key cog was behind the budding Gonzaga program/machine.

Ya, Mark Few is overrated. Great argument!

1. So Dan Fitzgerald set the table for both Monson AND FEW. Huh, conveniently left Few out of that one.
2. You are beyond help if you think Few would have the same success in the Big or ACC over the same period of time. Your own citation in #1 above makes that point.

 

[SelectionSunday]

1. So Dan Fitzgerald set the table for both Monson AND FEW. Huh, conveniently left Few out of that one.
2. You are beyond help if you think Few would have the same success in the Big or ACC over the same period of time. Your own citation in #1 above makes that point.

BB, I'll give you #1. You are correct. I should have said set the table for both of them. That's more than fair.

As for #2, where in my comments did I say a single word about Few having the "same success in the Big Ten or ACC over the same period of time"? It's pretty clear my point is that anyone even remotely suggesting that Few is overrated as a coach is just plain silly.

 

[BarnBurner]

All of you Mark Few fans/apologists look at his accomplishments and compare them to Minnesota, and Monson, a school that was hit with some of the worst sanctions and restrictions and whose reputation took one of the worst hits EVER. But believe whatever you all want.

If my team is going to the NCAA tourney every single year I'd expect more than 2 Sweet 16s in 13 straight trips, which also included 3 first round exits, as a #6, a #7 and a #10 seed. And of their 2nd round exits, one of those was as a #1 seed, another as a #2 seed and another as a #3 seed. Their 2 trips to the Sweet 16 were as a #3 and a #4 seed, so basically doing only what they were supposed to. As for the other 2nd round exits, one was as a #7 seed, two as #8 seeds and one as a #9 seed, so all 4 of those were also no better or worse than they were expected to do.

So, basically, there was ONLY ONE YEAR where Gonzaga exceeded expectations over that 13 year period, and that was their winning a 1st round game as an #11 seed, which is the seed where the most upsets happen, so again, HARDLY a big upset.


So... Few lived off of the Elite 8 run in 99, his first 2 years, then went 13 seasons straight only once exceeding expectations despite earning 13 straight chances to pull off an unexpected run, and how did he/they "earn" it? By dominating a league that before Gonzaga's Elite 8 run, was a 1 school invite only conference. And how hard was it supposed to be to dominate such a weak league after that Elite 8 run and the following back to back Sweet 16 runs with mostly Monson's players?


And trying to point at Monson's time at Minnesota as proof of anything is disingenuous at best as NO ONE could have won at Minnesota at that time and then who was going to hire Monson after that, and who was going to want to go and play bb for him? Maybe Few was more responsible for the 99 run than Monson was, but it's not fair comparing the two straight up as their circumstances were in no way equal. Had we taken Few instead of Monson, I'd bet Monson would have done BETTER at Gonzaga, than Few did for the first 5-6 years after that 99 season, and Few would have struggled just as much, if not more at Minnesota and then we'd have let him go and then he'd have been the one stuck having to go to some crappy school to try to resurrect his coaching reputation. I might be wrong, I admit as much. But I might be right, too.

And naming sources at Gonzaga??? lol Yeah, sure, because they'd be unbiased? BS, of course they are going to pimp their current coach.

Great work KillmeNow. You are spot on.

GH geniuses and GH Royalty conveniently forget that NO ONE would touch the MN job. NO ONE. Monson took it. Didn't have much success. Please don't remind the geniuses and royalty about the real, true damage to the program that resulted from the Haskins deal. Those are the folks that have probably never had to bust it in tough situations, just to survive.

Some of the responses to your post are truly priceless. Keep up the good work.

 

[BarnBurner]

BB, I'll give you #1. You are correct. I should have said set the table for both of them. That's more than fair.

As for #2, where in my comments did I say a single word about Few having the "same success in the Big Ten or ACC over the same period of time"? It's pretty clear my point is that anyone even remotely suggesting that Few is overrated as a coach is just plain silly.

Yes, I am correct.

It's pretty clear your suggestion hinges on Few's success at Gonzaga. Perhaps his success at MN, for example, or Wake Forest, would not have risen to the level of "silly"?

 

[BarnBurner]

BTW - it is time for the AD to earn his keep. The AD should be consulting with Badger and 1984, for starters.

Time to bring it home, Mr. AD.

 

[KillmeNow]

The second bolding is just factually wrong. In 13 seasons they exceeded seed expectations 7 times.

Where did you get your information? The Gonzaga website? lol I explained it all but I guess you are too STA-STA-STA-Stoopid to understand simple math.

2001-02 - 6 seed - lost in 1st round - DISAPPOINTMENT.
2002-03 - 9 seed - lost in 2nd round - No better than expected. My guess is you counted this one?
2003-04 - 2 seed - lost in 2nd round - HUGE DISAPPOINTMENT.
2004-05 - 3 seed - lost in 2nd round - DISAPPOINTMENT.
2005-06 - 3 seed - lost in Sweet 16 - No better than expected. Did you count this one, too?
2006-07 - 10 seed - lost in 1st round - No better than expected.
2007-08 - 7 seed - lost in 1st round - DISAPPOINTMENT.
2008-09 - 4 seed - lost in Sweet 16 - No better than expected. Did you count this one?
2009-10 - 8 seed - lost in 2nd round - No better than expected.
2010-11 - 11 seed - lost in 2nd round - This is THE ONLY LEGIT UPSET.
2011-12 - 7 seed - lost in 2nd round - No better than expected.
2012-13 - 1 seed - lost in 2nd round - HUGE DISAPPOINTMENT.
2013-14 - 8 seed - lost in 2nd round - No better than expected.

Two HUGE disappointments, 3 slight disappointments, 7 seasons where they finished exactly where they were expected to, basically(no one considers a 9 seed beating an 8 seed an upset) and JUST ONE season where they finished better than expected, and it was one of the classic 11 vs 6 seed matchups that produce upsets more than any other matchup in NCAA tourney history since going to 64 team format.

1 Seed Expectation = Final Four, anything less is a disappointment.

2 Seed Expectation = Elite 8, anything less is a disappointment. Only a Final Four run is going beyond what is expected.

3/4 Seed Expectation = Sweet 16, anything less is a disappointment. Elite 8 or beyond is going beyond what is expected.

5/6/7 Seed Expectation = 2nd Round, anything less is a disappointment, Sweet 16 and beyond is better than expected.

8/9 Seed Expectation = Every fan of a team with one of these matchups feels it's a disappointment if their team does not win, but basically none of them will bet their mortgage on their team winning.

10/11 Seed Expectation = Well, it's not a disappointment when a team seeded here loses, but anyone who does well at picking March Madness Brackets picks at least 2-4 correct upsets among the 8 10/11 seeds.


So how the hell do you figure 7 seasons of exceeding expectations? I count just ONE, but would accept if you insisted on it being TWO, as technically a #9 seed beating an #8 is an upset, although no real cbb fan could consider it such.

 

[BarnBurner]

Where did you get your information? The Gonzaga website? lol I explained it all but I guess you are too STA-STA-STA-Stoopid to understand simple math.

2001-02 - 6 seed - lost in 1st round - DISAPPOINTMENT.
2002-03 - 9 seed - lost in 2nd round - No better than expected. My guess is you counted this one?
2003-04 - 2 seed - lost in 2nd round - HUGE DISAPPOINTMENT.
2004-05 - 3 seed - lost in 2nd round - DISAPPOINTMENT.
2005-06 - 3 seed - lost in Sweet 16 - No better than expected. Did you count this one, too?
2006-07 - 10 seed - lost in 1st round - No better than expected.
2007-08 - 7 seed - lost in 1st round - DISAPPOINTMENT.
2008-09 - 4 seed - lost in Sweet 16 - No better than expected. Did you count this one?
2009-10 - 8 seed - lost in 2nd round - No better than expected.
2010-11 - 11 seed - lost in 2nd round - This is THE ONLY LEGIT UPSET.
2011-12 - 7 seed - lost in 2nd round - No better than expected.
2012-13 - 1 seed - lost in 2nd round - HUGE DISAPPOINTMENT.
2013-14 - 8 seed - lost in 2nd round - No better than expected.

Two HUGE disappointments, 3 slight disappointments, 7 seasons where they finished exactly where they were expected to, basically(no one considers a 9 seed beating an 8 seed an upset) and JUST ONE season where they finished better than expected, and it was one of the classic 11 vs 6 seed matchups that produce upsets more than any other matchup in NCAA tourney history since going to 64 team format.

1 Seed Expectation = Final Four, anything less is a disappointment.

2 Seed Expectation = Elite 8, anything less is a disappointment. Only a Final Four run is going beyond what is expected.

3/4 Seed Expectation = Sweet 16, anything less is a disappointment. Elite 8 or beyond is going beyond what is expected.

5/6/7 Seed Expectation = 2nd Round, anything less is a disappointment, Sweet 16 and beyond is better than expected.

8/9 Seed Expectation = Every fan of a team with one of these matchups feels it's a disappointment if their team does not win, but basically none of them will bet their mortgage on their team winning.

10/11 Seed Expectation = Well, it's not a disappointment when a team seeded here loses, but anyone who does well at picking March Madness Brackets picks at least 2-4 correct upsets among the 8 10/11 seeds.


So how the hell do you figure 7 seasons of exceeding expectations? I count just ONE, but would accept if you insisted on it being TWO, as technically a #9 seed beating an #8 is an upset, although no real cbb fan could consider it such.

 

[KillmeNow]

So a #1 seed, a #2 seed, TWO #3 seeds and a #4 seed, and only 2 trips to the Sweet 16???

That's a coach with a team that's gotten overrated. Or it's an overrated coach?


Then a #6 seed and a #7 seed that both lost in the FIRST ROUND.


That's 5 out of 13 seasons that ended in disappointment.

 

[scools12]

This KillmeNow character is quite something.

Arguing in this thread that Mark Few is overrated and his first 13 years would not have met his expectations. While in another thread trying to make the point that Pitino who hasn't come close to what Few did is deserving of more time.

#YouCantMakeItUp

 

[Bad Gopher]

This KillmeNow character is quite something.

Arguing in this thread that Mark Few is overrated and his first 13 years would not have met his expectations. While in another thread trying to make the point that Pitino who hasn't come close to what Few did deserves more time.

#YouCantMakeItUp

This fool's errand has been taking up way too much space. People, please stop arguing these non-points.

 

[justthefacts]

Where did you get your information? The Gonzaga website? lol I explained it all but I guess you are too STA-STA-STA-Stoopid to understand simple math.

2001-02 - 6 seed - lost in 1st round - DISAPPOINTMENT.
2002-03 - 9 seed - lost in 2nd round - No better than expected. My guess is you counted this one?
2003-04 - 2 seed - lost in 2nd round - HUGE DISAPPOINTMENT.
2004-05 - 3 seed - lost in 2nd round - DISAPPOINTMENT.
2005-06 - 3 seed - lost in Sweet 16 - No better than expected. Did you count this one, too?
2006-07 - 10 seed - lost in 1st round - No better than expected.
2007-08 - 7 seed - lost in 1st round - DISAPPOINTMENT.
2008-09 - 4 seed - lost in Sweet 16 - No better than expected. Did you count this one?
2009-10 - 8 seed - lost in 2nd round - No better than expected.
2010-11 - 11 seed - lost in 2nd round - This is THE ONLY LEGIT UPSET.
2011-12 - 7 seed - lost in 2nd round - No better than expected.
2012-13 - 1 seed - lost in 2nd round - HUGE DISAPPOINTMENT.
2013-14 - 8 seed - lost in 2nd round - No better than expected.

Two HUGE disappointments, 3 slight disappointments, 7 seasons where they finished exactly where they were expected to, basically(no one considers a 9 seed beating an 8 seed an upset) and JUST ONE season where they finished better than expected, and it was one of the classic 11 vs 6 seed matchups that produce upsets more than any other matchup in NCAA tourney history since going to 64 team format.

1 Seed Expectation = Final Four, anything less is a disappointment.

2 Seed Expectation = Elite 8, anything less is a disappointment. Only a Final Four run is going beyond what is expected.

3/4 Seed Expectation = Sweet 16, anything less is a disappointment. Elite 8 or beyond is going beyond what is expected.

5/6/7 Seed Expectation = 2nd Round, anything less is a disappointment, Sweet 16 and beyond is better than expected.

8/9 Seed Expectation = Every fan of a team with one of these matchups feels it's a disappointment if their team does not win, but basically none of them will bet their mortgage on their team winning.

10/11 Seed Expectation = Well, it's not a disappointment when a team seeded here loses, but anyone who does well at picking March Madness Brackets picks at least 2-4 correct upsets among the 8 10/11 seeds.


So how the hell do you figure 7 seasons of exceeding expectations? I count just ONE, but would accept if you insisted on it being TWO, as technically a #9 seed beating an #8 is an upset, although no real cbb fan could consider it such.

I linked to a list of Gonzaga's PASE earlier. http://barttorvik.com/cgi-bin/ncaa.cgi?type=team&lookup=Gonzaga

Your seed expectations expect that every higher seed always win every time. That's not how sports works. Instead the smart (ie, standard) way to do it is to compare to how similarly seeded teams have done in the past. https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/news/story?id=3286167

Again, though, you're basically saying that it should be expected not only that Gonzaga go to the tournament every year, but that they meet seed expectations every year. Expecting that ANY team, let alone one with 3 prevous trips to the tournament, go every year for 13 years is CATEGORICALLY RIDICULOUS.

You can say it's easy to do because they're in a bad conference, but there are literally 250 teams in conferences as "bad" or worse than the WCC who aren't doing it.

 

[justthefacts]

So a #1 seed, a #2 seed, TWO #3 seeds and a #4 seed, and only 2 trips to the Sweet 16???

That's a coach with a team that's gotten overrated. Or it's an overrated coach?


Then a #6 seed and a #7 seed that both lost in the FIRST ROUND.


That's 5 out of 13 seasons that ended in disappointment.

That's a coach with a big extension because he was able to ACHIEVE all of those seeds. How many other active coaches have 5 years with 4 seeds or better? 10? Roy, Self, Wright, K, Boeheim, Sean Miller...

 

[KillmeNow]

This KillmeNow character is quite something.

Arguing in this thread that Mark Few is overrated and his first 13 years would not have met his expectations. While in another thread trying to make the point that Pitino who hasn't come close to what Few did is deserving of more time.

#YouCantMakeItUp

Not his first 13 seasons, his 3rd to 15th seasons.

And it's my whole point, Gonzaga gave Few a 13 year pass, where they had 5 seasons where they couldn't even meet the expectations their NCAA tourney seed would suggest was expected of them and only 1 out of 13 seasons where they surpassed those expectations.


And I'm not begging for Pitino to get more time, IF a sure fire home run hire coach can be found who is willing to replace him, and doesn't require us to risk dozens of millions of dollars if they end up failing, I'd be fine with that. But I'm just saying I think we'd eventually be ok if we stuck with Pitino. I think he's the safe bet.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

I see several people saying that if Pitino comes back next year, the Gophers could have a better team. But all of that is predicated on a series of "Ifs." If Oturu comes back - If Curry is healthy and contributes - if the new recruits are able to step in and contribute - if the returning players improve - and so on.

Well, yeah - if everything goes absolutely right, things could be better. but when does everything go absolutely right for Gopher Basketball?

Blind Faith is the name of a rock band. it's not the basis for rational expectations.

 

[The prez sez]

I see several people saying that if Pitino comes back next year, the Gophers could have a better team. But all of that is predicated on a series of "Ifs." If Oturu comes back - If Curry is healthy and contributes - if the new recruits are able to step in and contribute - if the returning players improve - and so on.

Well, yeah - if everything goes absolutely right, things could be better. but when does everything go absolutely right for Gopher Basketball?

Blind Faith is the name of a rock band. it's not the basis for rational expectations.

Kudos for the Blind Faith reference. Great band, awesome tunes. Regarding 'phars, they have become insignificant. Moving on.

 

[KillmeNow]

That's a coach with a big extension because he was able to ACHIEVE all of those seeds. How many other active coaches have 5 years with 4 seeds or better? 10? Roy, Self, Wright, K, Boeheim, Sean Miller...

Over the last 20+ years, I frequented several cbb forums and was almost always the only Minnesota fan at those sites, so I know that most of you goofy fans here at GH don't venture out and mingle with cbb fans of other schools much, outside of creeping around Badger sites or Hawkeye sites on occasion but your purpose is always to scout out what other's are saying about the Gophers. And I have never been a regular here because I get bored of talking to Gopher fans only. So I can tell you what the rest of the Cbb world thought of Gonzaga from 1999-2014. And I can tell you honestly, no one ever thought much of Gonzaga. They always thought that Gonzaga was overrated, and laughed at them and almost always picked them to lose early in the NCAA tourney, or whined and complained when they chose to believe in them and their #1 or #2 or #3 seeded teams only to end up disappointed with putting any faith in them.

All of you idiots are biased because of what they've done the last 5-6 years. None of you are looking at it from an unbiased perspective disregarding the last 5-6 years to look at the previous 13 years objectively.



I'm not dissing Few, good for him, for finding a school willing to stick with him for as long as they did. Too bad Pitino didn't find that kind of school. And part of the reason they probably did, was he probably passed on more than one opportunity to move on to a bigger and supposedly better school. I have a TON of respect for Mark Few. But I don't need to give him credit that he didn't earn, unlike most of you seem so wanting to do.

 

[KillmeNow]

I see several people saying that if Pitino comes back next year, the Gophers could have a better team. But all of that is predicated on a series of "Ifs." If Oturu comes back - If Curry is healthy and contributes - if the new recruits are able to step in and contribute - if the returning players improve - and so on.

Well, yeah - if everything goes absolutely right, things could be better. but when does everything go absolutely right for Gopher Basketball?

Blind Faith is the name of a rock band. it's not the basis for rational expectations.

So instead we should put BLIND FAITH in a new coach???

 

[Frank Grimey Grimes]

I see several people saying that if Pitino comes back next year, the Gophers could have a better team. But all of that is predicated on a series of "Ifs." If Oturu comes back - If Curry is healthy and contributes - if the new recruits are able to step in and contribute - if the returning players improve - and so on.

Well, yeah - if everything goes absolutely right, things could be better. but when does everything go absolutely right for Gopher Basketball?

Blind Faith is the name of a rock band. it's not the basis for rational expectations.

I agree with you and am pretty much set on moving on. But I'd argue hiring a new coach is a much bigger "if" than hoping Curry and Oturu are back. Even if they're not, I think we have a worse next year with a new coach than if Pitino is back, but I'm okay with that if the long term has a better outlook.

 

[PhillyGopher]

First rule of holes, dude....when you find yourself in one, stop digging.

Must be true - coming from a hole expert

 

[bhk3yx]

I see several people saying that if Pitino comes back next year, the Gophers could have a better team. But all of that is predicated on a series of "Ifs." If Oturu comes back - If Curry is healthy and contributes - if the new recruits are able to step in and contribute - if the returning players improve - and so on.

Well, yeah - if everything goes absolutely right, things could be better. but when does everything go absolutely right for Gopher Basketball?

Blind Faith is the name of a rock band. it's not the basis for rational expectations.

Non-unique. Everything said here applies to any alternative course of action also.

 

[vagopher]

I agree with you and am pretty much set on moving on. But I'd argue hiring a new coach is a much bigger "if" than hoping Curry and Oturu are back. Even if they're not, I think we have a worse next year with a new coach than if Pitino is back, but I'm okay with that if the long term has a better outlook.

I agree, and if we do move on, it's likely it will be a few years before we get back to where we could be next year if we don't, even if we do improve our long term prospects. But my greatest fear is that people will quickly become impatient with the next coach and we will once again be starting over. I have a lot of confidence in Coyle to make the right decision here, and the right hire, if that's what he decides to do. But if he does replace Pitino, I just hope that our fan base has the patience to give that hire the time needed to take this program to where I think it can go.

 

[USAF]

I'm not dissing Few, good for him, for finding a school willing to stick with him for as long as they did. Too bad Pitino didn't find that kind of school. And part of the reason they probably did, was he probably passed on more than one opportunity to move on to a bigger and supposedly better school. I have a TON of respect for Mark Few. But I don't need to give him credit that he didn't earn, unlike most of you seem so wanting to do.

Stick with him for as long as the did?? LOLOLOL.

Few went 188-41 in his first 7 years, with 6 conference championships and 7 NCAA tournaments, with 3 sweet sixteens.

I'm guessing had Pitino come somewhere close to that, the UofM would "be willing to stick with" him, too.

Christ, what a tool.

 

[KillmeNow]

Stick with him for as long as the did?? LOLOLOL.

Few went 188-41 in his first 7 years, with 6 conference championships and 7 NCAA tournaments, with 3 sweet sixteens.

I'm guessing had Pitino come somewhere close to that, the UofM would "be willing to stick with" him, too.

Christ, what a tool.

Those first 2 seasons had how many of HIS players on them? And the team Pitino inherited was hardly a team coming off an Elite 8 trip.

And Tubby was given FULL credit for his Natl Title at Kentucky? And you call me a tool? lol

 

[USAF]

Those first 2 seasons had how many of HIS players on them? And the team Pitino inherited was hardly a team coming off an Elite 8 trip.

And Tubby was given FULL credit for his Natl Title at Kentucky? And you call me a tool? lol

Well, 16 of those 41 losses came in those first two years, so it appears he did better when he got his own players in place.

This is too easy.

 

[KillmeNow]

Well, 16 of those 41 losses came in those first two years, so it appears he did better when he got his own players in place.

This is too easy.

Then how come they crapped their pants come March Madness??? After those first 2 seasons, just one of the next 13 did they do better in the NCAA tourney then they were predicted to do, but FIVE TIMES they did worse.

 

[justthefacts]

Not his first 13 seasons, his 3rd to 15th seasons.

And it's my whole point, Gonzaga gave Few a 13 year pass, where they had 5 seasons where they couldn't even meet the expectations their NCAA tourney seed would suggest was expected of them and only 1 out of 13 seasons where they surpassed those expectations.


And I'm not begging for Pitino to get more time, IF a sure fire home run hire coach can be found who is willing to replace him, and doesn't require us to risk dozens of millions of dollars if they end up failing, I'd be fine with that. But I'm just saying I think we'd eventually be ok if we stuck with Pitino. I think he's the safe bet.

Gonzaga gave Few a 13 year pass in which they MADE THE TOURNAMENT EVERY YEAR. Their AD must have had the patience of Job to have put up with a guy who quintupled their number of all-time tournament appearances.

I can see how that record is completely equivalent to a guy who has made the tournament twice in 7 years.

 

[Gopher-in-Keno]

If Pitino is fired at seasons end, how many players from this years team would we expect to transfer? I would assume Mashburn is gone, but how many current players do you think would move? When coaches get fired, do new coaches have to fill a lot of spots typically with spring signings and other transfers?

 

[howeda7]

If Pitino is fired at seasons end, how many players from this years team would we expect to transfer? I would assume Mashburn is gone, but how many current players do you think would move? When coaches get fired, do new coaches have to fill a lot of spots typically with spring signings and other transfers?

The two most likely are Ihnen and Tre Williams. Guys like Greenlee and Freeman are no loss. Carr and Willis have already transferred once.