ESPN's Jeff Borzello: "As of time of publish, it seems Ben Johnson is likely to get another year at Minnesota."

Donate To GopherHole

golfing18now said:
It's not apples to apples. True. But it has changed for everybody. You are competing against competition in the same landscape. So the results are still relevant. I'm not convinced that it is harder to turn around a program in this environment when you can recruit players to fill needs in a week's time. NIL matters too obviously but I don't believe success and NIL dollars are a linear relationship.

Ben Johnson may have been a good coach in a different era. He would probably prefer to be a program builder. He recruits good kids. But talk about "process" and "culture" and "time to gel" doesn't work in the year to year sprint that is college basketball now. Flipping the roster over every year doesn't benefit from prior year's results.
Click to expand...
Ben would not be a good coach in any era. His offensive scheme has no movement and his defensive scheme struggles with teams that use movement. In no era would Ben be a good head coach.
 

golfing18now said:
It's not apples to apples. True. But it has changed for everybody. You are competing against competition in the same landscape. So the results are still relevant. I'm not convinced that it is harder to turn around a program in this environment when you can recruit players to fill needs in a week's time. NIL matters too obviously but I don't believe success and NIL dollars are a linear relationship.

Ben Johnson may have been a good coach in a different era. He would probably prefer to be a program builder. He recruits good kids. But talk about "process" and "culture" and "time to gel" doesn't work in the year to year sprint that is college basketball now. Flipping the roster over every year doesn't benefit from prior year's results.
Click to expand...
That’s fair, and I think it is probably true that Ben would have been better in a prior era. I just think that this era is changing so rapidly and will likely continue to do so (can anyone confidently say what the NIL/revenue sharing rules will be in 3 years?) that I really don’t know how to evaluate any Power 5 coach any more. If you have a large NIL budget you’ll probably do well. If you don’t then it is tough sledding.
 

bga1 said:
Think of it this way (looking at it from Coyle's viewpoint). Let's suppose he has 7 million dollars to be on fixing basketball next year. He can do it with 2.3 million in buyout to Ben and 2 million to players and 2.7 million to a new, better coach (presumably)- or he can bet the whole 7 million on Ben and the players. Furthermore, Ben is likely to be able to keep his HS recruits economically, keep Frank, perhaps Cochran, Asuma and Grove. So now it's 2 million to Ben and 5 million goes in large part to portal recruits that Ben can go after day 1.
Click to expand...
Unless he's willing to cheat and cook the books (who are we kidding the U is the last one that will do that), it doesn't work this way. What they can "spend" on the players is set based on the media rights. It will be the same amount no matter who the coach is. They can't then add back what they "saved" on Ben's buyout on top of it.

The question is, do you want to spend year 1 of the "new era" of revenue sharing on a near-certain ~5-15 death march that finally fires Ben Johnson?

Or do you want to spend it on year 1 of what might be a 5-15 team with a new coach that at least offers hope (and might be better than 5-15 if they bring 2-3 guys with them and/or generate some NIL $$ that Ben surely won't).
 

WoodburyTim said:
Well if that is true(and it absolutely isn't) then why are we even paying Ben what we are? What a waste. Then go find a D2 coach with moderate success pay him $375,000 a year and when the press asks what the heck we are doing? We'll just say hey Coyle and roughly 15% of our fanbase believes that it doesn't matter who your coach is just how much NIL you have.

At least save a couple million a year.
Click to expand...
Ben is among the lowest paid coaches in the B1G. (I think the lowest paid, but not 100% sure.) The Mountain West pays high six figures up to around $2M. Ben makes $2.1M. My point is that paying someone $375k is not an option. The Summit League is basically glorified D2, and most coaches will have to prove themselves at a mid-major before moving to a B1G/SEC school.

The divide between the power conferences and the rest is greater than it has ever been. Hiring Tauer would be like hiring Ben back in year 1 where he has some promise but is entering a completely different world. Niko is in a closer place, but has an underwhelming resume considering how long he had been a coach. And he has no experience with how to handle a real NIL budget. Neither of them give me much hope.
 


bizzle22 said:
Ben is among the lowest paid coaches in the B1G. (I think the lowest paid, but not 100% sure.) The Mountain West pays high six figures up to around $2M. Ben makes $2.1M. My point is that paying someone $375k is not an option. The Summit League is basically glorified D2, and most coaches will have to prove themselves at a mid-major before moving to a B1G/SEC school.

The divide between the power conferences and the rest is greater than it has ever been. Hiring Tauer would be like hiring Ben back in year 1 where he has some promise but is entering a completely different world. Niko is in a closer place, but has an underwhelming resume considering how long he had been a coach. And he has no experience with how to handle a real NIL budget. Neither of them give me much hope.
Click to expand...
I know little about Tauer, but I'm confident he would coach circles around Ben. It would be hard not to with his head coaching experience. Tauer next season would be light years ahead of Ben year 1.
 

Bad Gopher said:
Both are far and away better coaches than Johnson and would outperform him by far with the same roster.
Click to expand...
Based on what? Short of Medved’s short stint in 2007 neither has any power 5 experience. There’s a significant difference there between competing against Tom Izzo and Matt Painter
 

bizzle22 said:
Ben is among the lowest paid coaches in the B1G. (I think the lowest paid, but not 100% sure.) The Mountain West pays high six figures up to around $2M. Ben makes $2.1M. My point is that paying someone $375k is not an option. The Summit League is basically glorified D2, and most coaches will have to prove themselves at a mid-major before moving to a B1G/SEC school.

The divide between the power conferences and the rest is greater than it has ever been. Hiring Tauer would be like hiring Ben back in year 1 where he has some promise but is entering a completely different world. Niko is in a closer place, but has an underwhelming resume considering how long he had been a coach. And he has no experience with how to handle a real NIL budget. Neither of them give me much hope.
Click to expand...
I suppose but at least both those guys have been a head coach before and won games at that.

Neither would blow me away but their resumes blow Ben’s away.
 

Bad Gopher said:
It's true. If you're going to keep him to see what he can do with more money, it has to be at least for two years. You should never make an employment decision based on only one year.
Click to expand...
No you don’t. Everything is essentially year to year with players now so I don't see it would impede recruiting. Why should it be different for coaches?
 



bizzle22 said:
Ben is among the lowest paid coaches in the B1G. (I think the lowest paid, but not 100% sure.) The Mountain West pays high six figures up to around $2M. Ben makes $2.1M. My point is that paying someone $375k is not an option. The Summit League is basically glorified D2, and most coaches will have to prove themselves at a mid-major before moving to a B1G/SEC school.

The divide between the power conferences and the rest is greater than it has ever been. Hiring Tauer would be like hiring Ben back in year 1 where he has some promise but is entering a completely different world. Niko is in a closer place, but has an underwhelming resume considering how long he had been a coach. And he has no experience with how to handle a real NIL budget. Neither of them give me much hope.
Click to expand...
The problem with your comparisons is that Ben had zero head coaching experience at any level. His coaching tree is average at best and he is in way over his head. Ben should thank God for the huge over payment he has received for the past four years. He has been blessed for being mediocre to bad as a coach and his family should never be in any need because of such blessing. Most people would desperately long for what Ben was gifted without having to prove themselves. That's like winning a lottery for four straight years.
However, the funding for nothing needs to end.
 

GopherBlood777 said:
I know little about Tauer, but I'm confident he would coach circles around Ben. It would be hard not to with his head coaching experience. Tauer next season would be light years ahead of Ben year 1.
Click to expand...
Why? I’m genuinely curious why you think this. He has many years of D3 experience, and no doubt won a lot of games there. He was also doing it in D3 with more resources than the guys he was coaching against. UST was one of the highest spenders on athletics in D3, and he was able to get a lot of transfers due to lower academic requirements than many other MIAC schools.

He’s done well his first couple years in the Summit League, but the Summit League is basically glorified D2. He’s not exactly coaching against Tom Izzo there, and he doesn’t have to deal with NIL. It’s a very different world than the B1G.
 

howeda7 said:
Unless he's willing to cheat and cook the books (who are we kidding the U is the last one that will do that), it doesn't work this way. What they can "spend" on the players is set based on the media rights. It will be the same amount no matter who the coach is. They can't then add back what they "saved" on Ben's buyout on top of it.

The question is, do you want to spend year 1 of the "new era" of revenue sharing on a near-certain ~5-15 death march that finally fires Ben Johnson?

Or do you want to spend it on year 1 of what might be a 5-15 team with a new coach that at least offers hope (and might be better than 5-15 if they bring 2-3 guys with them and/or generate some NIL $$ that Ben surely won't).
Click to expand...
I don't think you understand. They will have 20 million to spread around to the sports however they want- from revenue sharing. They can allocate more to basketball in the short term if they need to in order to kick start the program. They can also push donors for NIL for basketball. A portion of their revenue is indeed fundraising revenue- which they could gently steer towards NIL instead of direct to the athletic department. The total athletic department revenue was 149 million this past year. So they have the money, it is just a matter of how they work it.

It's not what I want, it's what the AD wants to do (I am not sure what he will do or why) and we can only theorize.
 

FinnGopher said:
The problem with your comparisons is that Ben had zero head coaching experience at any level. His coaching tree is average at best and he is in way over his head. Ben should thank God for the huge over payment he has received for the past four years. He has been blessed for being mediocre to bad as a coach and his family should never be in any need because of such blessing. Most people would desperately long for what Ben was gifted without having to prove themselves. That's like winning a lottery for four straight years.
However, the funding for nothing needs to end.
Click to expand...
The last 4 years are a sunk cost. They are done. We aren’t getting them back. What guarantee do we have that bringing in a coach with little to zero experience with NIL/revenue sharing will produce better results? (Remember - the system is going through a big change again next year.) I’d generally agree that he was lucky to get the last 4 years, but I’m not sure what any of that had to do with the program going forward.
 



forever a gopher said:
Let's ignore if you think he "deserves" another year for whatever reason you choose, and just look at this objectively. What is the absolute best-case scenario for next year that is actually plausible?

Looking at the roster, Betts, Frank Mitchell, Grayson Grove and Asuma will be the only returnees. Then add in three freshman who based on their rankings and other offers likely won't be big-time contributors out of the gate. That leaves up to 6 spots up in the air. If we go off of CBJ's history on the level of player he'll be able to attract, we can reasonably predict what those players will be like. Also looking at how long this year's team took to "gel" and in 25/26 relying a ton on "one and done" transfers yet again (likely also acclimating to the B1G from a lower division), what will be the performance of those guys the first 1/3 to half the season?

I would argue the absolute best case scenario is a 8-12 conference record with a bunch of cupcake wins in the non-con. If all things go right, at best it puts us on the fringe of the NCAA's, but very likely on the outside looking in. While there is always a chance, I have a hard time believing there is better than a 5-10% chance next year's team is better than this year's team. At which point I would say, what is the point of keeping him on? If you're rolling the dice on a 10% chance you're better and a fringe NCAA team, but the much higher likelihood is further alienating and driving away the fan base, is that really a risk worth taking?
Click to expand...
The one thing this team had was Dawson Garcia. An older proven scorer that you could build around. Don't have that coming g back at all this year. I think your percentages are high due to that reason.
 

bizzle22 said:
Why? I’m genuinely curious why you think this. He has many years of D3 experience, and no doubt won a lot of games there. He was also doing it in D3 with more resources than the guys he was coaching against. UST was one of the highest spenders on athletics in D3, and he was able to get a lot of transfers due to lower academic requirements than many other MIAC schools.

He’s done well his first couple years in the Summit League, but the Summit League is basically glorified D2. He’s not exactly coaching against Tom Izzo there, and he doesn’t have to deal with NIL. It’s a very different world than the B1G.
Click to expand...
He has hundreds of more games experience as a head coach and he wins. That alone is more convincing than what I've seen from Ben. Ben was hired the same year UST went D1, at this point what school hires Ben over Tauer using the last 4 years as a predictor of future success? The answer is likely only the U of M.
 

GopherBlood777 said:
He has hundreds of more games experience as a head coach and he wins. That alone is more convincing than what I've seen from Ben. Ben was hired the same year UST went D1, at this point what school hires Ben over Tauer using the last 4 years as a predictor of future success? The answer is likely only the U of M.
Click to expand...
Hundreds of wins at the D3 level is convincing? What NIL/Revenue sharing issues do you think he has experience with? Those are the most important factors for a D1 Power 5 coach. The Summit League is not in the same world as the Big Ten
 

bizzle22 said:
Hundreds of wins at the D3 level is convincing? What NIL/Revenue sharing issues do you think he has experience with? Those are the most important factors for a D1 Power 5 coach. The Summit League is not in the same world as the Big Ten
Click to expand...
Yep- for perspective- Omaha, who we pounded, won the Summit.
 


bga1 said:
I don't think you understand. They will have 20 million to spread around to the sports however they want- from revenue sharing. They can allocate more to basketball in the short term if they need to in order to kick start the program. They can also push donors for NIL for basketball. A portion of their revenue is indeed fundraising revenue- which they could gently steer towards NIL instead of direct to the athletic department. The total athletic department revenue was 149 million this past year. So they have the money, it is just a matter of how they work it.

It's not what I want, it's what the AD wants to do (I am not sure what he will do or why) and we can only theorize.
Click to expand...
I do understand, i'm not sure you do. There is a maximum revenue sharing of ~$21 million. All B1G teams will have that. Yes, they can divide it up however they want, and I hope the U will give a higher % towards basketball relative to others. But all of that is true no matter who the coach is.

Whatever $ they do or don't spend on Ben or a new coach or Ben's buyout do not effect total $ they can spend on the revenue sharing. The basketball program will get the same $ amount for that no matter who the coach is, unless you're suggesting that Coyle will give Ben a higher % than he would to a new coach.

The only way $$ "saved" on not firing Ben/hiring a new coach can go directly to paying players is if they somehow funnel it to Dinkytown Athletics, which is not allowed, or otherwise illegally pay the players outside of the revenue sharing fund. That will almost certainly not happen.
 

Interesting that many here seem to be out on Niko and Tauer due to lack of P5 experience but McCollum is the hottest name in the country and he has 1 year at D1 and the rest at D2.

I'm not a huge Tauer or Niko guy, but they would both have FAR superior resumes to what Johnson has. Experience at any level doesn't guarantee success at the next place, but by the same token winning and building at good team at any level has the same general principles.

Maybe KU will lose to UCF tonight and Self will want out 😆
 

bga1 said:
The presumption you make is that the recruits Ben has been able to get with only the NIL in place (and us having not much of it by high D1 standards) are the same type of recruits he will get with perhaps 3 million plus in revenue sharing. I think that if Coyle keeps Ben, the only way he is keeping him is if he is throwing him big financial backing.

Think of it this way (looking at it from Coyle's viewpoint). Let's suppose he has 7 million dollars to be on fixing basketball next year. He can do it with 2.3 million in buyout to Ben and 2 million to players and 2.7 million to a new, better coach (presumably)- or he can bet the whole 7 million on Ben and the players. Furthermore, Ben is likely to be able to keep his HS recruits economically, keep Frank, perhaps Cochran, Asuma and Grove. So now it's 2 million to Ben and 5 million goes in large part to portal recruits that Ben can go after day 1.

Ben has done poorly, under some bad circumstances. Very poorly in the W column which is what it is all about. However, his players have been credits to the institution in terms of character and they have played hard. This team over achieved their ability (for proof- look at our predictions at the start of the year).

To me if Coyle is making this decision on his own, if Ben doesn't make the NCAA tourney next year- they both should get fired. If Ben makes the tournament (as not one person here predicts) they both should get a raise and an extension. It's an "all in" moment.

Right now- either way, the program has bottom out and whether Ben is fired or not, we are about to get a string of good news for the program. The money is going to go into the program- it has to. Either we are getting a big time coach or we are throwing big time money behind Ben. Recruits play for money these days- not so much for the school names on the jersey.
Click to expand...
This makes no logical sense. Revenue sharing means dick since the teams we compete with get it too.
 

bizzle22 said:
Hundreds of wins at the D3 level is convincing? What NIL/Revenue sharing issues do you think he has experience with? Those are the most important factors for a D1 Power 5 coach. The Summit League is not in the same world as the Big Ten
Click to expand...
Yeah all that time Ben spent as an assistant for a p5 school is paying off in droves right now.
 

Bad Gopher said:
The strategy could be this: far easier to attract coaching talent next year being able to demonstrate having more money to spend and spending it. At this point, it's more speculative, requiring a leap of faith.
Click to expand...
That is a terrible gamble and will backfire when we stink next year and fan support craters. The job will be no more attractive and in fact, likely less.
 

Dave H said:
That is a terrible gamble and will backfire when we stink next year and fan support craters. The job will be no more attractive and in fact, likely less.
Click to expand...
The only possible upside I can sell is that another humiliating season WHILE St. Thomas makes the NCAAs for the first time might embarrass U leadership into getting a bigger name than they would now.
 

howeda7 said:
Frank Mitchell is not Payne but he's been doing well. Our genius coach refuses to start him over Parker Fox. For all we know, Payne might not start over Parker Fox either. He certainly might not play 28 minutes. Who can make sense of Ben's wisdom?
Click to expand...
Are you questioning an elite coach who's done an incredible job?
 


GopherBlood777 said:
Yeah all that time Ben spent as an assistant for a p5 school is paying off in droves right now.
Click to expand...
When Ben got that experience NIL didn’t exist. Hiring someone else without that experience is basically like re-hiring Ben four years ago.
 


Bad Gopher said:
Both are far and away better coaches than Johnson and would outperform him by far with the same roster.
Click to expand...
Smith, who was just fired, does better in the non-con and has us solidly in the postseason.

Ben can't even get teams into the NIT conversation regularly.
 

bizzle22 said:
Based on what? Short of Medved’s short stint in 2007 neither has any power 5 experience. There’s a significant difference there between competing against Tom Izzo and Matt Painter
Click to expand...
For starters, they've both accomplished things and Ben has accomplished nothing. I've seen all three coach and all their teams play, including multiple Medved teams. I'm going to believe my eyes.

Izzo and Painter are excellent, but let's not pretend they're superhuman. Mortals can and have matched wits with them. The whole idea that nobody could do so as well as Johnson makes me laugh. He was abjectly unqualified when he was hired, and he would still struggle to tread water as a head coach at any level of basketball. To even compare him to Medved in any way is a joke.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom