I didn't consider the previous two seasons to be disappointments. If the results would have been the same last year, after losing Tony in January, I would have been disappointed. But there's the reality of losing him that made last year's results....okay with me. Not exceptional, but not disappointing. This year has been a big disappointment, no question. But to say "we're Miami" is a silly to me. Yes, Miami is better this year, but I'm saying 5-6 years in a row like Ohio is this year when I say we're not less than Miami. They've been bad, until this year, for several years in a row.

Look at every year, historically, since 1985, when the tournament went to 64+ teams. Since those years, 11-7 in the MAC has been the norm, with around 19-20 wins. That's where I'd set the realistic expectation level personally.

Beyond that, I went into the Ohio Basketball record book, link below, and popped the year over year win/loss numbers since 1980 into Excel to do a quick look at history. To me, that norm, over the last 37 years (not including this year because it's not complete) is what, within a little reason, the "expectations" should be. That 37 year average is 19.23 wins, 12.72 losses overall, 10.26 wins, and 7.01 losses in conference. Six NCAA Tournament appearance since 1980. I don't argue with your ROI comments regarding his contract and the extra investment causing a little loftier expectations, but how much more is realistic?

Further average numbers by coach:

Nee: 17.8-11.2; 12-5.67 (two NCAA's in 6 years)
Hahn: 14-15; 7.33-8.67 (three seasons)
Hunter: 17-12.33; 10.25-7.25 (1 NCAA in 12 years)
TOS: 17.14-13.57; 9.29-8.14 (1 NCAA in 7 years)
Groce: 21.25-14; 8.5-7.5 (two NCAA's in 4 years)
JC: 24.5-11; 12.5-4.5 (two seasons)
Saul: 19.23-12.73; 9-9 (3 seasons - I left out this year since it's not complete)


http://static.psbin.com/0/3/6j5k96ia30mtyv/ohio_mbb_1718_...

Sure. It’s a ridiculous statement. You are saying that every player on the team needs to be on the all-MAC freshman team and then All-MAC as a sophomore. No MAC team has ever had, or will have all their players do that. It’s just silly. And you know better dude.

With all the extra games now (preseason and post season tournaments), I think winning percentage is far more important. Even Hollywood has started comparing tickets sold vs. revenue for all time biggest movies.

Over the course of a season or career, I agree on winning percentage as a better means of analysis. In conference, total wins works for me because it's been a similar number of games over decades.

The interesting stat was that JG was 8.5 and 7.5 in the MAC, but made the NCAA twice. Groce didn't have an outstanding regular season record, but was able to win the conference tournament. For a league that gets only one bid, that is key. Play well for three games in March and get into the round of 68. He punched his ticket to the Big Ten on being able to peak in early March.

Did you really refer to Danny Née as “Knee”? Your season tickets and fan status should probably be questioned 😎

To quote Aaron Rogers, some people need to "R-E-L-A......XXXXXXXXX." Seriously, back away from the ledge. No coach would be winning with what has happened to this roster in the past 7-8 months. That's not making excuses, it's looking at the situation and being realistic.

Counterpoint: Would a standout coach HAVE this roster? Look at the recruiting grid and tell me honestly you see 12 quality MAC-level players.

Does any coach in the MAC have that roster?

Name one MAC team where I can take their prospective conference POY and have him unexpectedly grad transfer, then take your best remaining player off the floor for the year, then take your next two best players and severely limit them with injury, and you'd still have an NCAA tournament team. Name that team for me.

Here's a fun little tidbit after scouring the old recruiting threads:

Groce recruited Jaaron Simmons out of high school. For those on this board who still hold that grudge.

My point isn't that injuries should have no effect. My point is that our injuries have exposed a much deeper problem. We have players on scholarship (not all, but all too many) who aren't ready to contribute when they get here, aren't developing and progressing in their time here and are not even average by MAC standards.

Great! Now we can be an average or below-average MAC team! Our dreams are coming true as soon as we're healthy.

Two guys on that list - Laster and Taylor - have significantly and notably improved in their tenure. Others, whether from injury or some other reason, have either slid backward or stayed relatively the same. I'm including Kirk in that group, who is a huge talent with massive potential but still hasn't adjusted his shot or game one iota. Maybe that's good enough for you, but it shouldn't be.