(07-12-2019 08:04 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-12-2019 07:43 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(07-12-2019 12:26 PM)Pan95 Wrote:  Question for you and anyone else for that matter: what would your metric for improvement be if we don't show significant progress in the wins column?

My metric is wins, period. Win by a point, win in a rout, win ugly, win in good weather, win in bad weather...just win.
If we have a 1-11 or worse year, i cannot imagine what anybody could point to as improvement.

My metric is always wins. "You are what your record says you are."

But I also care about how the team looks. I never thought Bailiff would be able to sustain winning because 1) he didn't at Texas State, and 2) his teams always looked sloppy and disorganized to me. After 2009, I was ready to let him go. Although I will be disappointed if we don't improve materially this year, I think it is reasonable to give Bloomgren the same three years that I gave Bailiff. Certainly after year two, I still didn't believe his approach would work, but I was willing to give him a chance. For me, 2009 was that chance and he flunked it.

I want to see a team that plays crisply and executes flawlessly (or as close to flawlessly as possible). If we get that, against the caliber of opponents in CUSA, I think the record will take care of itself.

I don't think a coach should get year 3 if he showed no improvement in wins in years 1 and 2. Bloomgren did not improve the win total in year 1. Ergo, for me, he must at a minimum do so in year 2. This is not a low bar to clear -- literally it would take only 2 wins -- but there needs to be at least some kind of bar.