Realistic expectations for 2023-24?

Donate To GopherHole

Level to keep Ben’s job.

No more than 3 losses in NC.
6 wins inB1G if games are competitive (think Scott Frost).

Wait….

Reading that I realize there is no point in clinging to moral victories!

Ben needs 8 conference wins minimum.
 

Otis said:
Level to keep Ben’s job.

No more than 3 losses in NC.
6 wins inB1G if games are competitive (think Scott Frost).

Wait….

Reading that I realize there is no point in clinging to moral victories!

Ben needs 8 conference wins minimum.
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to agree. The first scenario would translate into a 14-17 record over 31 games. While that's substantial improvement from this season, that's still 3 straight losing seasons. No single Gopher coach has had 3 straight losing seasons since Dave McMillan in the late 1920s (interestingly, though, McMillan was 13-4 in the year following that streak).

The second scenario would yield a 16-15 record over 31 games (assuming the same number of non-conference losses). That would be our first season of .500 or better since 2019 so maybe that's enough to warrant another year.
 


cjbfbp said:
I'm inclined to agree. The first scenario would translate into a 14-17 record over 31 games. While that's substantial improvement from this season, that's still 3 straight losing seasons. No single Gopher coach has had 3 straight losing seasons since Dave McMillan in the late 1920s (interestingly, though, McMillan was 13-4 in the year following that streak).

The second scenario would yield a 16-15 record over 31 games (assuming the same number of non-conference losses). That would be our first season of .500 or better since 2019 so maybe that's enough to warrant another year.
Click to expand...
This would all still require good roster management and some good guard recruits coming in to ensure future success.

I would think with the guys developing and the ones coming in it should be easier to land a better portal PG.
 




Otis said:
This would all still require good roster management and some good guard recruits coming in to ensure future success.

I would think with the guys developing and the ones coming in it should be easier to land a better portal PG.
Click to expand...
At this point I don't care if it is easy or hard. Go find a good point guard. Do your job.

Right now we are paying him 800k per Big Ten win for the first 2 years. That's a little hefty. I'd like to dollar cost average that down a bit....a lot.
 

howeda7 said:
NIT or bust.
Click to expand...

But, as you have noted before, there is a narrow window for making the NIT under the current rules because of all the automatic qualifiers. We could finish with a 17-14 record and not make the NIT but that would be a substantial improvement and our first winning season since 2019.
 



cjbfbp said:
But, as you have noted before, there is a narrow window for making the NIT under the current rules because of all the automatic qualifiers. We could finish with a 17-14 record and not make the NIT but that would be a substantial improvement and our first winning season since 2019.
Click to expand...
This is true. But the bar SHOULD be NCAA or bust by year 3. We're still lowering it by at least a win or two.
 

Bronny James is still available!

Lol, that might generate some hype.
 

bleedsmaroonandgold said:
My expectation on hiring a new coach would be that they be in an NCAA tournament and have a .500 B1G or better season within their first three seasons. That is still where I am at.
Click to expand...

Yes, but I'm not sure that's where the university is "at." If you'd care to write a $10 million check to the athletic department, perhaps those two sets of standards could be more closely aligned.
 

howeda7 said:
This is true. But the bar SHOULD be NCAA or bust by year 3. We're still lowering it by at least a win or two.
Click to expand...

I think that standard could be unwise. If Iowa had that standard, Fran McCaffrey would have been fired after his first 3 years (losing season, NIT, NIT) and that would have been a big mistake.
 





cjbfbp said:
I think that standard could be unwise. If Iowa had that standard, Fran McCaffrey would have been fired after his first 3 years (losing season, NIT, NIT) and that would have been a big mistake.
Click to expand...
Pre-portal equals a different world in terms of college basketball.
 

well, the title says "realistic" expectations. of course, then we get into how everyone defines "realistic." my on-line dictionary has: having or showing a sensible and practical idea of what can be achieved or expected.

so - trying to be realistic, a better record than this season. But beyond that, I think it's realistic to expect a better-looking product on the court. a team that doesn't have 4-or-5 minute scoring droughts. a team that doesn't make as many mistakes or dumb turnovers. A team that has a clear offensive and defensive identity.

in short, a team that is more fun to watch. that's what I thought we would get this year. well, we had better get that next year.

if they do the kinds of things I'm talking about, then the record will follow.
 

Wet_Blanket_Guy said:
Pre-portal equals a different world in terms of college basketball.
Click to expand...

I think you need to think through your theories a little more thoroughly. The conventional wisdom is that underachievers at higher level programs will try to transfer down to lower level programs and higher achievers at lower level programs will try to transfer up to higher level programs. Since most schools at various levels are going to gain or lose these players from or to the portal, that should leave the competitive balances within conferences not much different than it is now.
 
Last edited:

I know the refrain is that Evans and Christie save the program and Ben, but I was looking at some of the other message boards in the Big10 and there are rumors the other teams are bringing in recruits to make their teams better too.
 

cjbfbp said:
I think you need to think through your theories a little more thoroughly. The conventional wisdom is that underachievers at higher level programs will try to transfer down to lower level programs and higher achievers at lower level programs will try to transfer up to higher level programs. Since most schools at various levels are going to gain or lose these players from or to the portal, that should leave the competitive balances within conferences not much different than it is now.
Click to expand...
There are countless examples of teams
Being built quick with portal turnarounds.
 

Wet_Blanket_Guy said:
There are countless examples of teams
Being built quick with portal turnarounds.
Click to expand...

Countless? I don't think so. I think you could count them and there wouldn't be that many who had significant "turnarounds" because of portal transfers. Iowa State is the foremost example one who did. Most other teams might improve themselves but not enough to dramatically alter their competitive standing.
 

cjbfbp said:
Countless? I don't think so. I think you could count them and there wouldn't be that many who had significant "turnarounds" because of portal transfers. Iowa State is the foremost example one who did. Most other teams might improve themselves but not enough to dramatically alter their competitive standing.
Click to expand...
I was just looking at how Shaka Smart has Marquette soaring in just his second year. His squad is dominated by Sophomores. Three of his recruits at Texas followed him to Marquette giving him a nice nucleus. Not much from the portal but he also kept some of the previous players.
 

bga1 said:
I was just looking at how Shaka Smart has Marquette soaring in just his second year. His squad is dominated by Sophomores. Three of his recruits at Texas followed him to Marquette giving him a nice nucleus. Not much from the portal but he also kept some of the previous players.
Click to expand...
But imagine how much better they could be with more wingspan.
 

cjbfbp said:
Countless? I don't think so. I think you could count them and there wouldn't be that many who had significant "turnarounds" because of portal transfers. Iowa State is the foremost example one who did. Most other teams might improve themselves but not enough to dramatically alter their competitive standing.
Click to expand...
LSU, Mississippi State, Kansas State, Missouri (you could even argue Penn State at this point)
 

bga1 said:
At this point I don't care if it is easy or hard. Go find a good point guard. Do your job.

Right now we are paying him 800k per Big Ten win for the first 2 years. That's a little hefty. I'd like to dollar cost average that down a bit....a lot.
Click to expand...
You aren't paying him anything. Football is.
 

WoodburyTim said:
I know the refrain is that Evans and Christie save the program and Ben, but I was looking at some of the other message boards in the Big10 and there are rumors the other teams are bringing in recruits to make their teams better too.
Click to expand...
Yes but none of them have the wingspan of Evans coming in.
 


4-16 type record. Remember other ‘lower level’ B10 teams are really improving; Nebraska, Penn St, Northwestern, Rutgers, etc. Mid-level teams Wisconsin, Maryland, Iowa, and Michigan won’t sit still / drop….. Honestly, who will we be better than??
 

WoodburyTim said:
I know the refrain is that Evans and Christie save the program and Ben, but I was looking at some of the other message boards in the Big10 and there are rumors the other teams are bringing in recruits to make their teams better too.
Click to expand...
Fortunately, though, nobody else's current players will improve. Only ours.
 

Oly O Hooper said:
4-16 type record. Remember other ‘lower level’ B10 teams are really improving; Nebraska, Penn St, Northwestern, Rutgers, etc. Mid-level teams Wisconsin, Maryland, Iowa, and Michigan won’t sit still / drop….. Honestly, who will we be better than??
Click to expand...
You have lost sight of the lose to win objective.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom