there are really only two , maybe 3 areas where you can take issue with the athletic department -

1. FCS vs FBS - where the fan base is equally divided. See 8 years of postings. For half of the fanbase, this is a non issue and realize we are in a good place and well positioned when the right opp is presented.

2. Mens basketball - we have not gotten this right for any number of reasons, including facilities. The facility issues will be remedied and we will be well positioned to succeed with Lou, or have a great platform for the next coach. I believe once this gets turnaround, we will become an annual player similar to what we see in Football.

3. maybe, maybe for LH's sake, you can argue Men's baseball.

(04-22-2019 10:02 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  it's hilarious how some people just blindly look at men's hoops and student subsidy without any thought or comment about anything else.

i think some on here want us to be George Mason.

Let's compare finances for the two:

Ticket Sales: JMU 3,090,411.....GMU 777,143
Contributions: JMU 2,405,641.....GMU 1,372,266
Rights: JMU 2,939,833.....GMU 4,969,486

total non Student Fee Revenue:
JMU 8,435,885......GMU 7,118,895

why do we make so much more organic revenue than GMU? From tickets to donations. They beat us on A10 shares, but the A10 is losing its luster and will soon be a 1 bid league. That number will start to go down for GMU

Moving on:

Total School subsidy: JMU 39,119,920.....GMU 22,269,485
% of Rev from subsidy: JMU 81.14%.....GMU 75.11%

6% does not seem like a big difference and I'd bet ours would be lower than GMU if the stadium expenses were removed.

the total is obviously higher because of football. We need more.

so, in order to become a "basketball school" and make the numbers look better, we should de-emphasize football right? that'll help, right?

Make us more like our "peers"?

Puhlease people. We'll see decreased organic revenue, which will trickle down to the lacrosse, softball, men's soccer, etc....all those teams that are winning and winning big.

is that better? We should put more of our resources into mens' hoops and become more like GMU?

No thanks. i like what we are doing. we are a model athletics program that any non-P5 would love to have.

More resources into our MBB program will make us into Mason? That's nonsensical.

As it stands now, we are the model for a women's mid-major athletics program, and perhaps a model for a D-1AA/regional university.

We are NOT a model for a mid-major national university playing FCS and a MBB program that can't even dominate a lower tier mid-major conference.

(04-22-2019 11:19 AM)2Buck Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 10:02 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  it's hilarious how some people just blindly look at men's hoops and student subsidy without any thought or comment about anything else.

i think some on here want us to be George Mason.

Let's compare finances for the two:

Ticket Sales: JMU 3,090,411.....GMU 777,143
Contributions: JMU 2,405,641.....GMU 1,372,266
Rights: JMU 2,939,833.....GMU 4,969,486

total non Student Fee Revenue:
JMU 8,435,885......GMU 7,118,895

why do we make so much more organic revenue than GMU? From tickets to donations. They beat us on A10 shares, but the A10 is losing its luster and will soon be a 1 bid league. That number will start to go down for GMU

Moving on:

Total School subsidy: JMU 39,119,920.....GMU 22,269,485
% of Rev from subsidy: JMU 81.14%.....GMU 75.11%

6% does not seem like a big difference and I'd bet ours would be lower than GMU if the stadium expenses were removed.

the total is obviously higher because of football. We need more.

so, in order to become a "basketball school" and make the numbers look better, we should de-emphasize football right? that'll help, right?

Make us more like our "peers"?

Puhlease people. We'll see decreased organic revenue, which will trickle down to the lacrosse, softball, men's soccer, etc....all those teams that are winning and winning big.

is that better? We should put more of our resources into mens' hoops and become more like GMU?

No thanks. i like what we are doing. we are a model athletics program that any non-P5 would love to have.

More resources into our MBB program will make us into Mason? That's nonsensical.

As it stands now, we are the model for a women's mid-major athletics program, and perhaps a model for a D-1AA/regional university.

We are NOT a model for a mid-major national university playing FCS and a MBB program that can't even dominate a lower tier mid-major conference.

people are advocating reallocating our resources away from FCS and other sports and towards men's basketball.

isn't that what mason does?

our men's soccer elite eight (s/h/b final four) was a women's program?
football success, which drives donations and rights/licensing revnue, a women's program?

it's pretty hard to have success 'across the board' in men's sports when you are 60% female as a university and Title IX limits us to only 6 men's sports.

(04-22-2019 10:31 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  there are really only two areas where you can take issue with the athletic department -

1. FCS vs FBS - where the fan base is equally divided. See 8 years of postings. For half of the fanbase, this is a non issue and realize we are in a good place and well positioned when the right opp is presented.

2. Mens basketball - we have not gotten this right for any number of reasons, including facilities. The facility issues will be remedied and we will be well positioned to succeed with Lou, or have a great platform for the next coach. I believe once this gets turnaround, we will become an annual player similar to what we see in Football.

^^^^^^ & say it out loud.

"the only two areas that JMU alum can have with athletics is football (division/conference) and men's basketball."

That is like a parent describing a private high school like this; "The only issues I have with the school are academics that suck and the tuition is top the class expensive x3...but the restrooms are clean and enjoy a fresh smelling restroom"

JMU's two weakest athletic programs defined as the programs that can create max PR and max $$$ for the university are the same programs that every large state university in the country use to steer and drive the bus.

Football and men's basketball are the meal, the other sports are tasty and add to the meal, like gravy.

Go Dukes (all sports)

(04-22-2019 11:26 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 10:31 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  there are really only two areas where you can take issue with the athletic department -

1. FCS vs FBS - where the fan base is equally divided. See 8 years of postings. For half of the fanbase, this is a non issue and realize we are in a good place and well positioned when the right opp is presented.

2. Mens basketball - we have not gotten this right for any number of reasons, including facilities. The facility issues will be remedied and we will be well positioned to succeed with Lou, or have a great platform for the next coach. I believe once this gets turnaround, we will become an annual player similar to what we see in Football.

^^^^^^ & say it out loud.

"the only two areas that JMU alum can have with athletics is football (division/conference) and men's basketball."

That is like a parent describing a private high school like this; "The only issues I have with the school are academics that suck and the tuition is top the class expensive x3...but the restrooms are clean and enjoy a fresh smelling restroom"

JMU's two weakest athletic programs defined as the programs that can create max PR and max $$$ for the university are the same programs that every large state university in the country use to steer and drive the bus.

Football and men's basketball are the meal, the other sports are tasty and add to the meal, like gravy.

Go Dukes (all sports)

except, as a public university, Federal law says we have to have the other sports.
Isn't it better to be good at them?

you guys can't tell me winning the lacrosse title or having success in softball and men's soccer or any other sport isn't beneficial.

yea, maybe not the scale of football and men's hoops, or even women's hoops.
but if we are "forced" into having those programs (via Title IX), i'd rather we go for it as best we can and be damn good at them. and we are.

(04-22-2019 11:25 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 11:19 AM)2Buck Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 10:02 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  it's hilarious how some people just blindly look at men's hoops and student subsidy without any thought or comment about anything else.

i think some on here want us to be George Mason.

Let's compare finances for the two:

Ticket Sales: JMU 3,090,411.....GMU 777,143
Contributions: JMU 2,405,641.....GMU 1,372,266
Rights: JMU 2,939,833.....GMU 4,969,486

total non Student Fee Revenue:
JMU 8,435,885......GMU 7,118,895

why do we make so much more organic revenue than GMU? From tickets to donations. They beat us on A10 shares, but the A10 is losing its luster and will soon be a 1 bid league. That number will start to go down for GMU

Moving on:

Total School subsidy: JMU 39,119,920.....GMU 22,269,485
% of Rev from subsidy: JMU 81.14%.....GMU 75.11%

6% does not seem like a big difference and I'd bet ours would be lower than GMU if the stadium expenses were removed.

the total is obviously higher because of football. We need more.

so, in order to become a "basketball school" and make the numbers look better, we should de-emphasize football right? that'll help, right?

Make us more like our "peers"?

Puhlease people. We'll see decreased organic revenue, which will trickle down to the lacrosse, softball, men's soccer, etc....all those teams that are winning and winning big.

is that better? We should put more of our resources into mens' hoops and become more like GMU?

No thanks. i like what we are doing. we are a model athletics program that any non-P5 would love to have.

More resources into our MBB program will make us into Mason? That's nonsensical.

As it stands now, we are the model for a women's mid-major athletics program, and perhaps a model for a D-1AA/regional university.

We are NOT a model for a mid-major national university playing FCS and a MBB program that can't even dominate a lower tier mid-major conference.

people are advocating reallocating our resources away from FCS and other sports and towards men's basketball.

isn't that what mason does?

our men's soccer elite eight (s/h/b final four) was a women's program?
football success, which drives donations and rights/licensing revnue, a women's program?

it's pretty hard to have success 'across the board' in men's sports when you are 60% female as a university and Title IX limits us to only 6 men's sports.

I guess this is why JMU is, and probably always will be, a "small" regional university. Prioritizing the more obscure sports over football and MBB is great for those inside the bubble, but as far as energizing and engaging alumni it will never happen on a national level.

(04-22-2019 11:30 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 11:26 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 10:31 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  there are really only two areas where you can take issue with the athletic department -

1. FCS vs FBS - where the fan base is equally divided. See 8 years of postings. For half of the fanbase, this is a non issue and realize we are in a good place and well positioned when the right opp is presented.

2. Mens basketball - we have not gotten this right for any number of reasons, including facilities. The facility issues will be remedied and we will be well positioned to succeed with Lou, or have a great platform for the next coach. I believe once this gets turnaround, we will become an annual player similar to what we see in Football.

^^^^^^ & say it out loud.

"the only two areas that JMU alum can have with athletics is football (division/conference) and men's basketball."

That is like a parent describing a private high school like this; "The only issues I have with the school are academics that suck and the tuition is top the class expensive x3...but the restrooms are clean and enjoy a fresh smelling restroom"

JMU's two weakest athletic programs defined as the programs that can create max PR and max $$$ for the university are the same programs that every large state university in the country use to steer and drive the bus.

Football and men's basketball are the meal, the other sports are tasty and add to the meal, like gravy.

Go Dukes (all sports)

except, as a public university, Federal law says we have to have the other sports.
Isn't it better to be good at them?

you guys can't tell me winning the lacrosse title or having success in softball and men's soccer or any other sport isn't beneficial.

yea, maybe not the scale of football and men's hoops, or even women's hoops.
but if we are "forced" into having those programs (via Title IX), i'd rather we go for it as best we can and be damn good at them. and we are.

You're telling us the success of those sports is coming at the expense of MBB and national level football, and we're telling you if we had to choose one or the other- we'd choose success at MBB and national level football. But why does it have to be one or the other given the size of our budget?

(04-22-2019 12:02 PM)2Buck Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 11:30 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 11:26 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 10:31 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  there are really only two areas where you can take issue with the athletic department -

1. FCS vs FBS - where the fan base is equally divided. See 8 years of postings. For half of the fanbase, this is a non issue and realize we are in a good place and well positioned when the right opp is presented.

2. Mens basketball - we have not gotten this right for any number of reasons, including facilities. The facility issues will be remedied and we will be well positioned to succeed with Lou, or have a great platform for the next coach. I believe once this gets turnaround, we will become an annual player similar to what we see in Football.

^^^^^^ & say it out loud.

"the only two areas that JMU alum can have with athletics is football (division/conference) and men's basketball."

That is like a parent describing a private high school like this; "The only issues I have with the school are academics that suck and the tuition is top the class expensive x3...but the restrooms are clean and enjoy a fresh smelling restroom"

JMU's two weakest athletic programs defined as the programs that can create max PR and max $$$ for the university are the same programs that every large state university in the country use to steer and drive the bus.

Football and men's basketball are the meal, the other sports are tasty and add to the meal, like gravy.

Go Dukes (all sports)

except, as a public university, Federal law says we have to have the other sports.
Isn't it better to be good at them?

you guys can't tell me winning the lacrosse title or having success in softball and men's soccer or any other sport isn't beneficial.

yea, maybe not the scale of football and men's hoops, or even women's hoops.
but if we are "forced" into having those programs (via Title IX), i'd rather we go for it as best we can and be damn good at them. and we are.

You're telling us the success of those sports is coming at the expense of MBB and national level football, and we're telling you if we had to choose one or the other- we'd choose success at MBB and national level football. But why does it have to be one or the other given the size of our budget?

i'm not telling you that.
I don't think JMU is "choosing" success in one sport over the other. That's ridiculous to think.

we keep bringing up men's hoops. are we not building a state of the art basketball arena? how is that "choosing" to not succeed?

you guys act like it's our god given right to be good at every sport, every year because we are "JMU". that's the kind of arrogance that makes other school's fans laugh at us.

i'm not happy about the state of men's hoops at all. it sucks to suck. but to act like we are "choosing" to be good at women's lacrosse at the expense of men's hoops is just ludicrous IMO.

it just hasn't happened for us. bad hires. bad luck. outdated arena. whatever the reason.
when we hired Matt Brady we could have hired Matt Doherty. Who was a big name at the time. He came to the Convo and laughed at it. That was over a decade ago.
It takes time to make capital improvements. We are finally at the point to get it done and it's coming in a year and a half. And i believe it will be a game changer for us.

(04-22-2019 10:02 AM)Duke Dawg Wrote:  it's hilarious how some people just blindly look at men's hoops and student subsidy without any thought or comment about anything else.

i think some on here want us to be George Mason.

Let's compare finances for the two:

Ticket Sales: JMU 3,090,411.....GMU 777,143
Contributions: JMU 2,405,641.....GMU 1,372,266
Rights: JMU 2,939,833.....GMU 4,969,486

total non Student Fee Revenue:
JMU 8,435,885......GMU 7,118,895

why do we make so much more organic revenue than GMU? From tickets to donations. They beat us on A10 shares, but the A10 is losing its luster and will soon be a 1 bid league. That number will start to go down for GMU

Moving on:

Total School subsidy: JMU 39,119,920.....GMU 22,269,485
% of Rev from subsidy: JMU 81.14%.....GMU 75.11%

6% does not seem like a big difference and I'd bet ours would be lower than GMU if the stadium expenses were removed.

the total is obviously higher because of football. We need more.

so, in order to become a "basketball school" and make the numbers look better, we should de-emphasize football right? that'll help, right?

Make us more like our "peers"?

Puhlease people. We'll see decreased organic revenue, which will trickle down to the lacrosse, softball, men's soccer, etc....all those teams that are winning and winning big.

is that better? We should put more of our resources into mens' hoops and become more like GMU?

No thanks. i like what we are doing. we are a model athletics program that any non-P5 would love to have.

Great post! This is the big picture. Be great at one sport or have a very successful athletics program overall. I choose overall success.

(04-22-2019 11:26 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 10:31 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  there are really only two areas where you can take issue with the athletic department -

1. FCS vs FBS - where the fan base is equally divided. See 8 years of postings. For half of the fanbase, this is a non issue and realize we are in a good place and well positioned when the right opp is presented.

2. Mens basketball - we have not gotten this right for any number of reasons, including facilities. The facility issues will be remedied and we will be well positioned to succeed with Lou, or have a great platform for the next coach. I believe once this gets turnaround, we will become an annual player similar to what we see in Football.

^^^^^^ & say it out loud.

"the only two areas that JMU alum can have with athletics is football (division/conference) and men's basketball."

That is like a parent describing a private high school like this; "The only issues I have with the school are academics that suck and the tuition is top the class expensive x3...but the restrooms are clean and enjoy a fresh smelling restroom"

JMU's two weakest athletic programs defined as the programs that can create max PR and max $$$ for the university are the same programs that every large state university in the country use to steer and drive the bus.

Football and men's basketball are the meal, the other sports are tasty and add to the meal, like gravy.

Go Dukes (all sports)

outside of a vocal minority, I believe most fans believe football is in the right place. Winning Nat Champs and positioned for a move when it makes sense. Even if you dont agree with our conference, it is hard to say football is in a bad spot.

so that really leaves one issue, which is mens basketball on which we all agree. Some believe we have not made an investment, while I and others believe we are making prudent decisions. Some look at the hiring of Lou as going cheap and not making an investment. I believe it was the unwillingness to over pay for unproven coaching talent available when Lou was hired. as I understand it, the pool was not strong and "name / sizzle" coach (Sanchez - 8 wins @ UNCC) wanted to be overpaid due to lack of facilities. $90 million facility is quite an investment. If Lou does not succeed, lets see what the admin does.

lastly, we talk about peers. Stanford, UVa, UNC, Michigan, Florida, Texas, etc all have strong athletic programs from top to bottom, men and woman. A10, CUSA, Sunbelt, App State, Ga Southern, Marshall, Charlotte, GW, Duquesne, St. Bonnies, VCU, Dayton, etc. Do not.

turkey and mashed potatoes without Gravy, just seem dry to me.

(04-23-2019 10:10 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 11:26 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 10:31 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  there are really only two areas where you can take issue with the athletic department -

1. FCS vs FBS - where the fan base is equally divided. See 8 years of postings. For half of the fanbase, this is a non issue and realize we are in a good place and well positioned when the right opp is presented.

2. Mens basketball - we have not gotten this right for any number of reasons, including facilities. The facility issues will be remedied and we will be well positioned to succeed with Lou, or have a great platform for the next coach. I believe once this gets turnaround, we will become an annual player similar to what we see in Football.

^^^^^^ & say it out loud.

"the only two areas that JMU alum can have with athletics is football (division/conference) and men's basketball."

That is like a parent describing a private high school like this; "The only issues I have with the school are academics that suck and the tuition is top the class expensive x3...but the restrooms are clean and enjoy a fresh smelling restroom"

JMU's two weakest athletic programs defined as the programs that can create max PR and max $$$ for the university are the same programs that every large state university in the country use to steer and drive the bus.

Football and men's basketball are the meal, the other sports are tasty and add to the meal, like gravy.

Go Dukes (all sports)

outside of a vocal minority, I believe most fans believe football is in the right place. Winning Nat Champs and positioned for a move when it makes sense. Even if you dont agree with our conference, it is hard to say football is in a bad spot.

so that really leaves one issue, which is mens basketball on which we all agree. Some believe we have not made an investment, while I and others believe we are making prudent decisions. Some look at the hiring of Lou as going cheap and not making an investment. I believe it was the unwillingness to over pay for unproven coaching talent available when Lou was hired. as I understand it, the pool was not strong and "name / sizzle" coach (Sanchez - 8 wins @ UNCC) wanted to be overpaid due to lack of facilities. $90 million facility is quite an investment. If Lou does not succeed, lets see what the admin does.

lastly, we talk about peers. Stanford, UVa, UNC, Michigan, Florida, Texas, etc all have strong athletic programs from top to bottom, men and woman. A10, CUSA, Sunbelt, App State, Ga Southern, Marshall, Charlotte, GW, Duquesne, St. Bonnies, VCU, Dayton, etc. Do not.

turkey and mashed potatoes without Gravy, just seem dry to me.

I believe it was unwillingness to pay for proven coaching talent when Lou was hired. That continues to be the problem.

I hate even commenting on this thread, because I think the future is bright, of course that will be subject future Presidents and ADs.

So you pay for one kid to go to W&M, one to go to Harvard, and the third one you won't even pay for NOVA. Does that mean the kid that you won't even pay to go to NOVA should be fine based on the success of the other two?

Two Premier programs. One well managed, the other couldn't be much worse.

Ratings Based on potential

Football = 10
Men's Basketball = 1
Softball = 10
Women's Lacrosse = 10
Women's basketball = 9
Baseball = 2

Everybody hits and misses on coaches. But hiring Lou was hardly even trying. Not one of the other 350 division 1 schools wanted him as head coach. Lou can be a very good assistant coach. He was put in a position to fail, much like the position we put Dillard in by holding onto him for so long.

We expect a successful Men's program at the same cost of our Women's program.

Anyone think that makes sense? PG, make sense to you?

(04-23-2019 10:33 AM)Dukester Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 10:10 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 11:26 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 10:31 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  there are really only two areas where you can take issue with the athletic department -

1. FCS vs FBS - where the fan base is equally divided. See 8 years of postings. For half of the fanbase, this is a non issue and realize we are in a good place and well positioned when the right opp is presented.

2. Mens basketball - we have not gotten this right for any number of reasons, including facilities. The facility issues will be remedied and we will be well positioned to succeed with Lou, or have a great platform for the next coach. I believe once this gets turnaround, we will become an annual player similar to what we see in Football.

^^^^^^ & say it out loud.

"the only two areas that JMU alum can have with athletics is football (division/conference) and men's basketball."

That is like a parent describing a private high school like this; "The only issues I have with the school are academics that suck and the tuition is top the class expensive x3...but the restrooms are clean and enjoy a fresh smelling restroom"

JMU's two weakest athletic programs defined as the programs that can create max PR and max $$$ for the university are the same programs that every large state university in the country use to steer and drive the bus.

Football and men's basketball are the meal, the other sports are tasty and add to the meal, like gravy.

Go Dukes (all sports)

outside of a vocal minority, I believe most fans believe football is in the right place. Winning Nat Champs and positioned for a move when it makes sense. Even if you dont agree with our conference, it is hard to say football is in a bad spot.

so that really leaves one issue, which is mens basketball on which we all agree. Some believe we have not made an investment, while I and others believe we are making prudent decisions. Some look at the hiring of Lou as going cheap and not making an investment. I believe it was the unwillingness to over pay for unproven coaching talent available when Lou was hired. as I understand it, the pool was not strong and "name / sizzle" coach (Sanchez - 8 wins @ UNCC) wanted to be overpaid due to lack of facilities. $90 million facility is quite an investment. If Lou does not succeed, lets see what the admin does.

lastly, we talk about peers. Stanford, UVa, UNC, Michigan, Florida, Texas, etc all have strong athletic programs from top to bottom, men and woman. A10, CUSA, Sunbelt, App State, Ga Southern, Marshall, Charlotte, GW, Duquesne, St. Bonnies, VCU, Dayton, etc. Do not.

turkey and mashed potatoes without Gravy, just seem dry to me.

I believe it was unwillingness to pay for proven coaching talent when Lou was hired. That continues to be the problem.

I hate even commenting on this thread, because I think the future is bright, of course that will be subject future Presidents and ADs.

So you pay for one kid to go to W&M, one to go to Harvard, and the third one you won't even pay for NOVA. Does that mean the kid that you won't even pay to go to NOVA should be fine based on the success of the other two?

Two Premier programs. One well managed, the other couldn't be much worse.

Ratings Based on potential

Football = 10
Men's Basketball = 1
Softball = 10
Women's Lacrosse = 10
Women's basketball = 9
Baseball = 2

Everybody hits and misses on coaches. But hiring Lou was hardly even trying. Not one of the other 350 division 1 schools wanted him as head coach. Lou can be a very good assistant coach. He was put in a position to fail, much like the position we put Dillard in by holding onto him for so long.

We expect a successful Men's program at the same cost of our Women's program.

Anyone think that makes sense? PG, make sense to you?

And which of the 350 division 1 schools wanted to hire Matt Brady after he was fired, zero.

Would have been the right move to over pay for Sanchez who won 8 games and also lost to JMU this past season. I mean if Sanchez was so great beating JMU at home for him should have been a gimme.

Let's just let bball play out for another season and it will be crystal clear if Lou stays/goes.

As for baseball while it is a must that Ike make the CAA tournament to remain this season. Anyone that says this team is not way better than what Spanky has not seen this team play. The baseball team is poised to success if they can stay healthy. The FR SS out with a broken leg does not help and the FR 3rd basemen missing 1.5 weeks after a fastball to the noggin hurt. The position players on the baseball team are young and the pitching staff ERA is like half of what it was in Spanky's last season.

(04-23-2019 10:33 AM)Dukester Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 10:10 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 11:26 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 10:31 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  there are really only two areas where you can take issue with the athletic department -

1. FCS vs FBS - where the fan base is equally divided. See 8 years of postings. For half of the fanbase, this is a non issue and realize we are in a good place and well positioned when the right opp is presented.

2. Mens basketball - we have not gotten this right for any number of reasons, including facilities. The facility issues will be remedied and we will be well positioned to succeed with Lou, or have a great platform for the next coach. I believe once this gets turnaround, we will become an annual player similar to what we see in Football.

^^^^^^ & say it out loud.

"the only two areas that JMU alum can have with athletics is football (division/conference) and men's basketball."

That is like a parent describing a private high school like this; "The only issues I have with the school are academics that suck and the tuition is top the class expensive x3...but the restrooms are clean and enjoy a fresh smelling restroom"

JMU's two weakest athletic programs defined as the programs that can create max PR and max $$$ for the university are the same programs that every large state university in the country use to steer and drive the bus.

Football and men's basketball are the meal, the other sports are tasty and add to the meal, like gravy.

Go Dukes (all sports)

outside of a vocal minority, I believe most fans believe football is in the right place. Winning Nat Champs and positioned for a move when it makes sense. Even if you dont agree with our conference, it is hard to say football is in a bad spot.

so that really leaves one issue, which is mens basketball on which we all agree. Some believe we have not made an investment, while I and others believe we are making prudent decisions. Some look at the hiring of Lou as going cheap and not making an investment. I believe it was the unwillingness to over pay for unproven coaching talent available when Lou was hired. as I understand it, the pool was not strong and "name / sizzle" coach (Sanchez - 8 wins @ UNCC) wanted to be overpaid due to lack of facilities. $90 million facility is quite an investment. If Lou does not succeed, lets see what the admin does.

lastly, we talk about peers. Stanford, UVa, UNC, Michigan, Florida, Texas, etc all have strong athletic programs from top to bottom, men and woman. A10, CUSA, Sunbelt, App State, Ga Southern, Marshall, Charlotte, GW, Duquesne, St. Bonnies, VCU, Dayton, etc. Do not.

turkey and mashed potatoes without Gravy, just seem dry to me.

I believe it was unwillingness to pay for proven coaching talent when Lou was hired. That continues to be the problem.

I hate even commenting on this thread, because I think the future is bright, of course that will be subject future Presidents and ADs.

So you pay for one kid to go to W&M, one to go to Harvard, and the third one you won't even pay for NOVA. Does that mean the kid that you won't even pay to go to NOVA should be fine based on the success of the other two?

Two Premier programs. One well managed, the other couldn't be much worse.

Ratings Based on potential

Football = 10
Men's Basketball = 1
Softball = 10
Women's Lacrosse = 10
Women's basketball = 9
Baseball = 2

Everybody hits and misses on coaches. But hiring Lou was hardly even trying. Not one of the other 350 division 1 schools wanted him as head coach. Lou can be a very good assistant coach. He was put in a position to fail, much like the position we put Dillard in by holding onto him for so long.

We expect a successful Men's program at the same cost of our Women's program.

Anyone think that makes sense? PG, make sense to you?

i have said this 20 times if I have said it once.

15 years ago we made the decision to invest in football and we built an $80 mm stadium. Investments were not made in mens hoops. After the stadium was completed, it was decided to build the new convo. When we moved from Brady, we found our job was not attractive due to facilities. sure, we were building a new convo, but as you see with Lou, that new coach wouldnt get the benefit and could be fired before it was finished. coaches didnt want the risk and the coaching pool was poor. Would another $300k have landed a transformational coach? maybe. It was going to take $500 + to get sanchez who was hardly transformational. so we were going to overpay for an unknown. the admins believed it was best to hold off loading up on a coach and waiting until the new convo was done. with a new convo online, the pool of available coaches would be much stronger and the investment warranted. so yes, the admin held their powder until better positioned.

you guys are all into analogies. so do you pay for your kid to go to harvard but dont give them any books?

does the approach make sense to me? yes, if you believe the risk with an unproven and inexpensive alum is the same as an overpaid unproven assistant, why pay more for the same risk.

We could have paid more and gotten Sanchez, we would be in a different place right now? hard to say but using your evaluation methods ( 8 wins) , his early returns suggest no

(04-23-2019 10:44 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 10:33 AM)Dukester Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 10:10 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 11:26 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 10:31 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  there are really only two areas where you can take issue with the athletic department -

1. FCS vs FBS - where the fan base is equally divided. See 8 years of postings. For half of the fanbase, this is a non issue and realize we are in a good place and well positioned when the right opp is presented.

2. Mens basketball - we have not gotten this right for any number of reasons, including facilities. The facility issues will be remedied and we will be well positioned to succeed with Lou, or have a great platform for the next coach. I believe once this gets turnaround, we will become an annual player similar to what we see in Football.

^^^^^^ & say it out loud.

"the only two areas that JMU alum can have with athletics is football (division/conference) and men's basketball."

That is like a parent describing a private high school like this; "The only issues I have with the school are academics that suck and the tuition is top the class expensive x3...but the restrooms are clean and enjoy a fresh smelling restroom"

JMU's two weakest athletic programs defined as the programs that can create max PR and max $$$ for the university are the same programs that every large state university in the country use to steer and drive the bus.

Football and men's basketball are the meal, the other sports are tasty and add to the meal, like gravy.

Go Dukes (all sports)

outside of a vocal minority, I believe most fans believe football is in the right place. Winning Nat Champs and positioned for a move when it makes sense. Even if you dont agree with our conference, it is hard to say football is in a bad spot.

so that really leaves one issue, which is mens basketball on which we all agree. Some believe we have not made an investment, while I and others believe we are making prudent decisions. Some look at the hiring of Lou as going cheap and not making an investment. I believe it was the unwillingness to over pay for unproven coaching talent available when Lou was hired. as I understand it, the pool was not strong and "name / sizzle" coach (Sanchez - 8 wins @ UNCC) wanted to be overpaid due to lack of facilities. $90 million facility is quite an investment. If Lou does not succeed, lets see what the admin does.

lastly, we talk about peers. Stanford, UVa, UNC, Michigan, Florida, Texas, etc all have strong athletic programs from top to bottom, men and woman. A10, CUSA, Sunbelt, App State, Ga Southern, Marshall, Charlotte, GW, Duquesne, St. Bonnies, VCU, Dayton, etc. Do not.

turkey and mashed potatoes without Gravy, just seem dry to me.

I believe it was unwillingness to pay for proven coaching talent when Lou was hired. That continues to be the problem.

I hate even commenting on this thread, because I think the future is bright, of course that will be subject future Presidents and ADs.

So you pay for one kid to go to W&M, one to go to Harvard, and the third one you won't even pay for NOVA. Does that mean the kid that you won't even pay to go to NOVA should be fine based on the success of the other two?

Two Premier programs. One well managed, the other couldn't be much worse.

Ratings Based on potential

Football = 10
Men's Basketball = 1
Softball = 10
Women's Lacrosse = 10
Women's basketball = 9
Baseball = 2

Everybody hits and misses on coaches. But hiring Lou was hardly even trying. Not one of the other 350 division 1 schools wanted him as head coach. Lou can be a very good assistant coach. He was put in a position to fail, much like the position we put Dillard in by holding onto him for so long.

We expect a successful Men's program at the same cost of our Women's program.

Anyone think that makes sense? PG, make sense to you?

And which of the 350 division 1 schools wanted to hire Matt Brady after he was fired, zero.

Would have been the right move to over pay for Sanchez who won 8 games and also lost to JMU this past season. I mean if Sanchez was so great beating JMU at home for him should have been a gimme.

Let's just let bball play out for another season and it will be crystal clear if Lou stays/goes.

As for baseball while it is a must that Ike make the CAA tournament to remain this season. Anyone that says this team is not way better than what Spanky has not seen this team play. The baseball team is poised to success if they can stay healthy. The FR SS out with a broken leg does not help and the FR 3rd basemen missing 1.5 weeks after a fastball to the noggin hurt. The position players on the baseball team are young and the pitching staff ERA is like half of what it was in Spanky's last season.

"Better than Spanky".

Better than Keener.


You and I have different goals.

Baseball and Basketball should be top 4 most years and #1 or #2 at least every three years.

Baseball and Basketball have tremendous potential at JMU.

I'm looking for coaches that have the experience and results to suggest they will be will succeed at JMU.

Football coaches - Matthews, Withers, Houston, Cig. All had had success and/or bigger positions running programs.

How does that compare to what we got for Men's basketball or Baseball?

With Ike we got VMI's coach that was out of coaching for a year. The best we can do in baseball is getting a coach that VMI no longer wanted? Really? Oh yeah, but Dukester "he's better than Spanky".

And by the way - Spanky made it to the CAA tourney 4 of his last 5 years. How is that better than 0-3 Ike?

(04-23-2019 10:59 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 10:33 AM)Dukester Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 10:10 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 11:26 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 10:31 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  there are really only two areas where you can take issue with the athletic department -

1. FCS vs FBS - where the fan base is equally divided. See 8 years of postings. For half of the fanbase, this is a non issue and realize we are in a good place and well positioned when the right opp is presented.

2. Mens basketball - we have not gotten this right for any number of reasons, including facilities. The facility issues will be remedied and we will be well positioned to succeed with Lou, or have a great platform for the next coach. I believe once this gets turnaround, we will become an annual player similar to what we see in Football.

^^^^^^ & say it out loud.

"the only two areas that JMU alum can have with athletics is football (division/conference) and men's basketball."

That is like a parent describing a private high school like this; "The only issues I have with the school are academics that suck and the tuition is top the class expensive x3...but the restrooms are clean and enjoy a fresh smelling restroom"

JMU's two weakest athletic programs defined as the programs that can create max PR and max $$$ for the university are the same programs that every large state university in the country use to steer and drive the bus.

Football and men's basketball are the meal, the other sports are tasty and add to the meal, like gravy.

Go Dukes (all sports)

outside of a vocal minority, I believe most fans believe football is in the right place. Winning Nat Champs and positioned for a move when it makes sense. Even if you dont agree with our conference, it is hard to say football is in a bad spot.

so that really leaves one issue, which is mens basketball on which we all agree. Some believe we have not made an investment, while I and others believe we are making prudent decisions. Some look at the hiring of Lou as going cheap and not making an investment. I believe it was the unwillingness to over pay for unproven coaching talent available when Lou was hired. as I understand it, the pool was not strong and "name / sizzle" coach (Sanchez - 8 wins @ UNCC) wanted to be overpaid due to lack of facilities. $90 million facility is quite an investment. If Lou does not succeed, lets see what the admin does.

lastly, we talk about peers. Stanford, UVa, UNC, Michigan, Florida, Texas, etc all have strong athletic programs from top to bottom, men and woman. A10, CUSA, Sunbelt, App State, Ga Southern, Marshall, Charlotte, GW, Duquesne, St. Bonnies, VCU, Dayton, etc. Do not.

turkey and mashed potatoes without Gravy, just seem dry to me.

I believe it was unwillingness to pay for proven coaching talent when Lou was hired. That continues to be the problem.

I hate even commenting on this thread, because I think the future is bright, of course that will be subject future Presidents and ADs.

So you pay for one kid to go to W&M, one to go to Harvard, and the third one you won't even pay for NOVA. Does that mean the kid that you won't even pay to go to NOVA should be fine based on the success of the other two?

Two Premier programs. One well managed, the other couldn't be much worse.

Ratings Based on potential

Football = 10
Men's Basketball = 1
Softball = 10
Women's Lacrosse = 10
Women's basketball = 9
Baseball = 2

Everybody hits and misses on coaches. But hiring Lou was hardly even trying. Not one of the other 350 division 1 schools wanted him as head coach. Lou can be a very good assistant coach. He was put in a position to fail, much like the position we put Dillard in by holding onto him for so long.

We expect a successful Men's program at the same cost of our Women's program.

Anyone think that makes sense? PG, make sense to you?

i have said this 20 times if I have said it once.

15 years ago we made the decision to invest in football and we built an $80 mm stadium. Investments were not made in mens hoops. After the stadium was completed, it was decided to build the new convo. When we moved from Brady, we found our job was not attractive due to facilities. sure, we were building a new convo, but as you see with Lou, that new coach wouldnt get the benefit and could be fired before it was finished. coaches didnt want the risk and the coaching pool was poor. Would another $300k have landed a transformational coach? maybe. It was going to take $500 + to get sanchez who was hardly transformational. so we were going to overpay for an unknown. the admins believed it was best to hold off loading up on a coach and waiting until the new convo was done. with a new convo online, the pool of available coaches would be much stronger and the investment warranted. so yes, the admin held their powder until better positioned.

you guys are all into analogies. so do you pay for your kid to go to harvard but dont give them any books?

does the approach make sense to me? yes, if you believe the risk with an unproven and inexpensive alum is the same as an overpaid unproven assistant, why pay more for the same risk.

We could have paid more and gotten Sanchez, we would be in a different place right now? hard to say but using your evaluation methods ( 8 wins) , his early returns suggest no

I don't see Football and Men's basketball as one or the other. If that is the case why get a new Arena? I don't think basketball losing way less than $2,000,000 a year with bigger crowds and better success would hurt football.

lol Dukester ranks JMU Women's Basketball a 9 after a season of record wins and the next deepest WNIT run we've ever had, and having the best conference record since 2014

(04-23-2019 11:25 AM)Deez Nuts Wrote:  lol Dukester ranks JMU Women's Basketball a 9 after a season of record wins and the next deepest WNIT run we've ever had, and having the best conference record since 2014

Comical how you can rank a program that has not won the CAA the last year a 10. I think 9 is more than fair.

Nuts, you bar is lower than mine.

(04-23-2019 11:32 AM)Dukester Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 11:25 AM)Deez Nuts Wrote:  lol Dukester ranks JMU Women's Basketball a 9 after a season of record wins and the next deepest WNIT run we've ever had, and having the best conference record since 2014

Comical how you can rank a program that has not won the CAA the last year a 10. I think 9 is more than fair.

Nuts, you bar is lower than mine.

9 is way more than fair

(04-23-2019 11:17 AM)Dukester Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 10:44 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 10:33 AM)Dukester Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 10:10 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  

(04-22-2019 11:26 AM)Purplehazed Wrote:  ^^^^^^ & say it out loud.

"the only two areas that JMU alum can have with athletics is football (division/conference) and men's basketball."

That is like a parent describing a private high school like this; "The only issues I have with the school are academics that suck and the tuition is top the class expensive x3...but the restrooms are clean and enjoy a fresh smelling restroom"

JMU's two weakest athletic programs defined as the programs that can create max PR and max $$$ for the university are the same programs that every large state university in the country use to steer and drive the bus.

Football and men's basketball are the meal, the other sports are tasty and add to the meal, like gravy.

Go Dukes (all sports)

outside of a vocal minority, I believe most fans believe football is in the right place. Winning Nat Champs and positioned for a move when it makes sense. Even if you dont agree with our conference, it is hard to say football is in a bad spot.

so that really leaves one issue, which is mens basketball on which we all agree. Some believe we have not made an investment, while I and others believe we are making prudent decisions. Some look at the hiring of Lou as going cheap and not making an investment. I believe it was the unwillingness to over pay for unproven coaching talent available when Lou was hired. as I understand it, the pool was not strong and "name / sizzle" coach (Sanchez - 8 wins @ UNCC) wanted to be overpaid due to lack of facilities. $90 million facility is quite an investment. If Lou does not succeed, lets see what the admin does.

lastly, we talk about peers. Stanford, UVa, UNC, Michigan, Florida, Texas, etc all have strong athletic programs from top to bottom, men and woman. A10, CUSA, Sunbelt, App State, Ga Southern, Marshall, Charlotte, GW, Duquesne, St. Bonnies, VCU, Dayton, etc. Do not.

turkey and mashed potatoes without Gravy, just seem dry to me.

I believe it was unwillingness to pay for proven coaching talent when Lou was hired. That continues to be the problem.

I hate even commenting on this thread, because I think the future is bright, of course that will be subject future Presidents and ADs.

So you pay for one kid to go to W&M, one to go to Harvard, and the third one you won't even pay for NOVA. Does that mean the kid that you won't even pay to go to NOVA should be fine based on the success of the other two?

Two Premier programs. One well managed, the other couldn't be much worse.

Ratings Based on potential

Football = 10
Men's Basketball = 1
Softball = 10
Women's Lacrosse = 10
Women's basketball = 9
Baseball = 2

Everybody hits and misses on coaches. But hiring Lou was hardly even trying. Not one of the other 350 division 1 schools wanted him as head coach. Lou can be a very good assistant coach. He was put in a position to fail, much like the position we put Dillard in by holding onto him for so long.

We expect a successful Men's program at the same cost of our Women's program.

Anyone think that makes sense? PG, make sense to you?

And which of the 350 division 1 schools wanted to hire Matt Brady after he was fired, zero.

Would have been the right move to over pay for Sanchez who won 8 games and also lost to JMU this past season. I mean if Sanchez was so great beating JMU at home for him should have been a gimme.

Let's just let bball play out for another season and it will be crystal clear if Lou stays/goes.

As for baseball while it is a must that Ike make the CAA tournament to remain this season. Anyone that says this team is not way better than what Spanky has not seen this team play. The baseball team is poised to success if they can stay healthy. The FR SS out with a broken leg does not help and the FR 3rd basemen missing 1.5 weeks after a fastball to the noggin hurt. The position players on the baseball team are young and the pitching staff ERA is like half of what it was in Spanky's last season.

"Better than Spanky".

Better than Keener.


You and I have different goals.

Baseball and Basketball should be top 4 most years and #1 or #2 at least every three years.

Baseball and Basketball have tremendous potential at JMU.

I'm looking for coaches that have the experience and results to suggest they will be will succeed at JMU.

Football coaches - Matthews, Withers, Houston, Cig. All had had success and/or bigger positions running programs.

How does that compare to what we got for Men's basketball or Baseball?

With Ike we got VMI's coach that was out of coaching for a year. The best we can do in baseball is getting a coach that VMI no longer wanted? Really? Oh yeah, but Dukester "he's better than Spanky".

And by the way - Spanky made it to the CAA tourney 4 of his last 5 years. How is that better than 0-3 Ike?

It is always cute that some folks mis-state things to make some point. Ike made the CAA tournament once, has missed twice. Yes, it should be a rare instance when JMU misses the CAA tournament.

I don't think what we want is that different. I just think your expectations for rapid turnarounds of 2 programs (Mbball and baseball) that have been neglected in unrealistic. JMU with both programs was not in a position to land immediate recruits that were college ready to come in and turn around on a dime. With baseball pitching is KEY and JMU had very little when Spanky left. And contrary to what some folks think, JMU cannot sign freshman that make an immediate, significant impact as a starting pitcher (position players yes, pitchers no) those kids go the P5 programs or get drafted out of HS. JMU has to develop pitchers and pitching depth. JMU recruiting was a joke the last couple of years under Spanky...........JMU did NOT go to the major showcase tournaments, every other school in VA would be there, but JMU was absent. In recruiting out of sight out of mind, that is what Ike had to deal with and correct when he got here.......what any coach would have had to deal with.

My expectation is for JMU to regularly be a top 4 conference team in all sports and win conference titles. But I am not unrealistic and expect a program to go from bad to good in a year or 2.

The good news for some is that if Ike cannot get it done this year he will be gone, same as Lou.

JMU is patient with coaches for good reason and is NOT gonna waste money on a buyout for baseball, not buy out a coach with multiple years remaining.

(04-23-2019 11:41 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 11:17 AM)Dukester Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 10:44 AM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 10:33 AM)Dukester Wrote:  

(04-23-2019 10:10 AM)PGJMU2 Wrote:  outside of a vocal minority, I believe most fans believe football is in the right place. Winning Nat Champs and positioned for a move when it makes sense. Even if you dont agree with our conference, it is hard to say football is in a bad spot.

so that really leaves one issue, which is mens basketball on which we all agree. Some believe we have not made an investment, while I and others believe we are making prudent decisions. Some look at the hiring of Lou as going cheap and not making an investment. I believe it was the unwillingness to over pay for unproven coaching talent available when Lou was hired. as I understand it, the pool was not strong and "name / sizzle" coach (Sanchez - 8 wins @ UNCC) wanted to be overpaid due to lack of facilities. $90 million facility is quite an investment. If Lou does not succeed, lets see what the admin does.

lastly, we talk about peers. Stanford, UVa, UNC, Michigan, Florida, Texas, etc all have strong athletic programs from top to bottom, men and woman. A10, CUSA, Sunbelt, App State, Ga Southern, Marshall, Charlotte, GW, Duquesne, St. Bonnies, VCU, Dayton, etc. Do not.

turkey and mashed potatoes without Gravy, just seem dry to me.

I believe it was unwillingness to pay for proven coaching talent when Lou was hired. That continues to be the problem.

I hate even commenting on this thread, because I think the future is bright, of course that will be subject future Presidents and ADs.

So you pay for one kid to go to W&M, one to go to Harvard, and the third one you won't even pay for NOVA. Does that mean the kid that you won't even pay to go to NOVA should be fine based on the success of the other two?

Two Premier programs. One well managed, the other couldn't be much worse.

Ratings Based on potential

Football = 10
Men's Basketball = 1
Softball = 10
Women's Lacrosse = 10
Women's basketball = 9
Baseball = 2

Everybody hits and misses on coaches. But hiring Lou was hardly even trying. Not one of the other 350 division 1 schools wanted him as head coach. Lou can be a very good assistant coach. He was put in a position to fail, much like the position we put Dillard in by holding onto him for so long.

We expect a successful Men's program at the same cost of our Women's program.

Anyone think that makes sense? PG, make sense to you?

And which of the 350 division 1 schools wanted to hire Matt Brady after he was fired, zero.

Would have been the right move to over pay for Sanchez who won 8 games and also lost to JMU this past season. I mean if Sanchez was so great beating JMU at home for him should have been a gimme.

Let's just let bball play out for another season and it will be crystal clear if Lou stays/goes.

As for baseball while it is a must that Ike make the CAA tournament to remain this season. Anyone that says this team is not way better than what Spanky has not seen this team play. The baseball team is poised to success if they can stay healthy. The FR SS out with a broken leg does not help and the FR 3rd basemen missing 1.5 weeks after a fastball to the noggin hurt. The position players on the baseball team are young and the pitching staff ERA is like half of what it was in Spanky's last season.

"Better than Spanky".

Better than Keener.


You and I have different goals.

Baseball and Basketball should be top 4 most years and #1 or #2 at least every three years.

Baseball and Basketball have tremendous potential at JMU.

I'm looking for coaches that have the experience and results to suggest they will be will succeed at JMU.

Football coaches - Matthews, Withers, Houston, Cig. All had had success and/or bigger positions running programs.

How does that compare to what we got for Men's basketball or Baseball?

With Ike we got VMI's coach that was out of coaching for a year. The best we can do in baseball is getting a coach that VMI no longer wanted? Really? Oh yeah, but Dukester "he's better than Spanky".

And by the way - Spanky made it to the CAA tourney 4 of his last 5 years. How is that better than 0-3 Ike?

It is always cute that some folks mis-state things to make some point. Ike made the CAA tournament once, has missed twice. Yes, it should be a rare instance when JMU misses the CAA tournament.

I don't think what we want is that different. I just think your expectations for rapid turnarounds of 2 programs (Mbball and baseball) that have been neglected in unrealistic. JMU with both programs was not in a position to land immediate recruits that were college ready to come in and turn around on a dime. With baseball pitching is KEY and JMU had very little when Spanky left. And contrary to what some folks think, JMU cannot sign freshman that make an immediate, significant impact as a starting pitcher (position players yes, pitchers no) those kids go the P5 programs or get drafted out of HS. JMU has to develop pitchers and pitching depth. JMU recruiting was a joke the last couple of years under Spanky...........JMU did NOT go to the major showcase tournaments, every other school in VA would be there, but JMU was absent. In recruiting out of sight out of mind, that is what Ike had to deal with and correct when he got here.......what any coach would have had to deal with.

My expectation is for JMU to regularly be a top 4 conference team in all sports and win conference titles. But I am not unrealistic and expect a program to go from bad to good in a year or 2.

The good news for some is that if Ike cannot get it done this year he will be gone, same as Lou.

JMU is patient with coaches for good reason and is NOT gonna waste money on a buyout for baseball, not buy out a coach with multiple years remaining.

But we're not talking about "a year or 2" with either MBB or BB. It's year 4 for Ike and LR's 4th coming up.

Patience is a virtue, but both MBB and BB have been languishing for years. I place the blame on the administration for being "patient" with HC's that should have been let go much, much earlier when it became evident that they weren't going to succeed at JMU.

Hope also springs eternal, and I'm hopeful the new United Arena does wonders for recruiting, and Ike somehow turn things around, and LR has a breakout year this Fall. That said, I don't believe either Ike or LR are the right guys to lead their respective programs forward. The bar is higher, and in that regard regard I'm in the same corner as Dukester.