Why? That seems incredibly reductive, and I don't understand why it makes sense that the school's highest paid employee should be measured by a single data point.

At some point, something accomplished in the 2020-2021 season sort of becomes irrelevant, right? I don't know that that's happened yet, but to decide Boals is a good coach until other coaches in the MAC win an NCAA tournament game feels like a completely arbitrary measure.


My "guiding light" is not other coaches. It's the basketball games that our basketball coach coaches and whether or not we're winning enough of them. When Boals plays Toledo, Akron, Kent State, and BG we lose more than we win. That's as true in the post-season as it is in the regular season.

Until that changes, we're far less likely to win NCAA tournament games and MAC Championships. What happens when we play the teams we need to beat to do those things is not irrelevant just because we won in 2021.

So again I ask, who is your guiding light? [/QUOTE]My answer is still that simply comparing him to other coaches on a couple of data points is not a good way to measure success. I don't think of any of those coaches as "guiding lights."

It does not matter to me what happens to Toledo in the MAC championship game unless Ohio is playing Toledo in the MAC championship game. Tod K isn't Ohio's coach, and his falling short in those games has no bearing whatsoever on what I think about Jeff Boals.

Similarly, it does not matter to me what happens to Akron when they get to the NCAA tournament. It's just not relevant to a discussion of Jeff Boals as a coach.

What matters is how well he recruits and prepares his teams to win the most important games on our schedule each year. The most important games we play take place in Cleveland, and against the top half of the MAC (basically always Akron, Kent State, Toledo, Miami, and us.

If you can't win those games consistently, MAC Championships and NCAA Tournament wins become more and more anomalous, and less reflective of the program that's actually being built.

The trendline for Boals isn't great right now. And his best team's best two players were guys he didn't recruit. His teams, full of guys he recruited, haven't been able to match that success, and I am not sure I see the case that given what we see right now the immediate future (next year, year after) is particularly bright.


[QUOTE=M.D.W.S.T]
Boals averages 19.6 wins a year. Others are all bunched together. Rob 20. Groce 21. Tod 22. So all things considered - the top four teams generally shift around the top four - it's relevant that we won in 2021, because others have't won at all.

This whole thing was a bizarre read.

But I encourage you to think about it a little more.

Look man, I know your mouth's full at the moment, but when Boals wraps up you should ask him if he thinks it doesn't matter that he can't beat Toledo and Akron.

Because I assure you that even he knows it's not a good thing that we lose to Toledo 90% of the time and Akron 70% of the time. Throw a .500 winning percentage against Kent State into that equation. Now do a little math and tell me what that does to our odds of winning MAC championships and NCAA tournament games. You know, the things you consider the only measure of success.

We know who we need to beat to do those things. We know how often we beat them. My stance here isn't some impossible to crack rubric. It's a pretty basic equation. If there are teams in your conference you barely ever beat, you're barely ever gonna go to NCAA tournament.

But your way of doing it -- measuring Boals based on the outcome of last year's Akron-Creighton game -- makes a lot of sense, too.

This a very interesting starting point for a revenue sharing conversation. The last sentence is particularly interesting since is the majority of our "revenue."

Revenue does not include direct or indirect school support, student fees or unrecompensed (i.e. charitable) contributions to the athletic department from alumni and boosters.

https://nil-ncaa.com/football /

I said it in another thread and I'll say it again.

Unless Hadaway is going to double as a backup center on that surgical ankle, we need to bring in TWO bigs if there are enough schollies to allow such. The "Vic replacement" doesn't have to be Jaren Jackson Jr. just not below the "Vic" level.