Ben Is the Coach - We Need Some Patience

[benlaur]

You nailed it, bud. I steadfastly believe there's such thing as being too patient, and I think that's what we've been.

Make no mistake, all our competitors in this league and elsewhere want us to continue to be patient to a fault. They're cleaning up on our passivity.

I hate to belabor a point, but the silliness around rate of pay is tough to ignore. If Coyle was hiring the head coaching position for his University, call it Coyle University, there is zero chance he would have paid someone with zero head coaching experience, zero name recognition, and zero suiters to be competing against, the amount of money and protection Coach Johnson received.

However, on someone else's dime it is fine? It would have been 100% in coach Johnson's interest to take the job at a fractional amount. The school doing the hiring was offering an incredible promotion while taking on an inordinate amount of risk. It is not debatable. Why is there zero accountability on top of all the other zeros?

My usual disclaimers apply: Good for Coach Johnson, there is no need for him to feel bad for outsmarting seasoned bureaucrats who throw other people's money around like it doesn't matter.

We must also consider that Coyle is AD in name only with no autonomy to do his job and is simply a figure head on top of something that is fundamentally broken.

Which gets to my last point: when you don't know who to blame when something is broken it is a clear sign you are dealing with an incredibly poorly designed bureaucracy or an very well designed one depending upon what side of it you are on.

 

[disco]

It looks like the NCAA list is missing some teams. I don't see St. Thomas and a couple others.

I don't know why they left off certain teams and I've heard 352 all season. My guess is that their folks just used the NCAA site too.

Read the wiki. They are not counting teams in transition to D1. That includes UST.

 

[GopherBlood777]

I have season tickets, so I would be extremely sad if Payne left. With that said...I would leave if I were him.

Ben should be starting him.

This still remains one of the weirdest decisions of the season. I like JOJ, but there is no way he should be starting when Payne is not.

 

[Bad Gopher]

This still remains one of the weirdest decisions of the season. I like JOJ, but there is no way he should be starting when Payne is not.

The list of weird decisions is long, but that's the king of them.

 

[MNVCGUY]

This still remains one of the weirdest decisions of the season. I like JOJ, but there is no way he should be starting when Payne is not.

Could be any number of reasons for it. Payne and JOJ are both averaging 26-27 minutes a night so I really don't think it matters that much.

I am going to guess that JOJ does the jump ball to start the game but I am not positive about that. That could be a big part of the reason he starts. Or maybe Payne is more comfortable coming in a little bit into the game....or maybe it is a way to hopefully keep him out of foul trouble.....

Fans get caught up in starter vs. non starter. If both guys are getting lots of minutes then it really doesn't matter who comes in first and who comes in second. Payne is starting to look more comfortable and is becoming more assertive. He has been one of the few bright spots this year so whatever they are doing with him seems to be working.

 

[cjbfbp]

Yes, he is way worse than them through their first two seasons. There has never been a coach at the U that has had a worse two year stretch. Richard Pitino never finished last. Clem Haskins never finished last.

As far as Clem, why don't you do the math?

Clem Haskins - first two years

Overall winning percentage = 33.9%
Conference winning percentage = 16.7%

Ben Johnson - first two years (to date)

Overall winning percentage = 35.1%
Conference winning percentage = 14.3%

Yeah, 14.3% in conference is way worse than 16.7%! Of course, Johnson still has a chance to win another.

The fact that Haskins became a big winner doesn't negate the fact that his first two years were almost identical to Johnson's.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

As far as Clem, why don't you do the math?

Clem Haskins - first two years

Overall winning percentage = 33.9%
Conference winning percentage = 16.7%

Ben Johnson - first two years (to date)

Overall winning percentage = 35.1%
Conference winning percentage = 14.3%

Yeah, 14.3% in conference is way worse than 16.7%! Of course, Johnson still has a chance to win another.

The fact that Haskins became a big winner doesn't negate the fact that his first two years were almost identical to Johnson's.

He is actually at 13.5% winning percentage right now. So there is about a 20% drop in winning percentage from Clem's first two seasons.

Clem never took last in the Big 10 and he won 20% more Big 10 games than CBJ. But you're right, Clem was pretty bad in his first two years, Ben has just been worse.

 

[GopherBlood777]

Could be any number of reasons for it. Payne and JOJ are both averaging 26-27 minutes a night so I really don't think it matters that much.

I am going to guess that JOJ does the jump ball to start the game but I am not positive about that. That could be a big part of the reason he starts. Or maybe Payne is more comfortable coming in a little bit into the game....or maybe it is a way to hopefully keep him out of foul trouble.....

Fans get caught up in starter vs. non starter. If both guys are getting lots of minutes then it really doesn't matter who comes in first and who comes in second. Payne is starting to look more comfortable and is becoming more assertive. He has been one of the few bright spots this year so whatever they are doing with him seems to be working.

Garcia takes the tip every game he starts. JOJ just feels like a redundant player when he is on the floor as a starter because him, Battle, and Garcia are basically all natural 4's. I would prefer him in a reserve role spelling Garcia/Battle. We don't have any other players like Payne and he has the highest field goal % of anyone on the team. He is also our strongest rebounder which has been a weakness this season. "He is doing good coming off the bench so trust the coach" is not something you give the benefit of doubt on when the team is 1-15 in conference. The most effective lineup multiple times this year has been Cooper/Carrington/Battle/Garcia/Payne. I can understand starting Henley over Carrington, but no way Payne should be coming off the bench on THIS team specifically. He brings too much to what we are lacking as a team.

 

[MNVCGUY]

Garcia takes the tip every game he starts. JOJ just feels like a redundant player when he is on the floor as a starter because him, Battle, and Garcia are basically all natural 4's. I would prefer him in a reserve role spelling Garcia/Battle. We don't have any other players like Payne and he has the highest field goal % of anyone on the team. He is also our strongest rebounder which has been a weakness this season. "He is doing good coming off the bench so trust the coach" is not something you give the benefit of doubt on when the team is 1-15 in conference. The most effective lineup multiple times this year has been Cooper/Carrington/Battle/Garcia/Payne. I can understand starting Henley over Carrington, but no way Payne should be coming off the bench on THIS team specifically. He brings too much to what we are lacking as a team.

All fair points. Payne has really taken a big step up in recent games.

I don’t know that starting Payne at this point really changes anything for this season so might play into why they are not shaking things up.

Important part to me is that he is logging significant minutes and showing signs of some serious potential. Both Payne and JOJ have been bright spots in a crap season.

 

[Blackhammer]

It’s more about minutes than starting. Problem is we have too many minutes and too few players. Lack of having to earn minutes because of lack of talent is an issue . Ramberg is out playing guys who are recruited scholarship players. Noticed Wisconsin plugged in a backup point yesterday who hardly plays and he was serviceable. We have absolutely no depth.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

It’s more about minutes than starting. Problem is we have too many minutes and too few players. Lack of having to earn minutes because of lack of talent is an issue . Ramberg is out playing guys who are recruited scholarship players. Noticed Wisconsin plugged in a backup point yesterday who hardly plays and he was serviceable. We have absolutely no depth.

We have 8 PFs. It's really weird.

 

[Spaulding!No!]

It’s more about minutes than starting. Problem is we have too many minutes and too few players. Lack of having to earn minutes because of lack of talent is an issue . Ramberg is out playing guys who are recruited scholarship players. Noticed Wisconsin plugged in a backup point yesterday who hardly plays and he was serviceable. We have absolutely no depth.

Pitino!

 

[Gopher Teeth]

NCAA.com only lists full members (which there are 352 of them). At the end of the day, it doesn't particularly matter how many there are - the Gophers FT shooting is terrible by any measure.

View attachment 24287

Come on guys, I think we can all agree, however long the list is we will be second to last, no one can take that from us.

 

[Dakota2]

If the player never steps foot on campus/never plays a game for the Gophers...does the coach actually get credit for recruiting him? CBJ should get zero credit for recruiting Evans. He will play zero minutes for them. In fact, you could go further and say...the writing was on the wall and if CBJ actually knew about this in January (when Evans made up his mind), yet he didn't do anything and let this drag on...that's horrendous. He should've immediately released him from the LOI back in January and hustled to find a guard prospect or started the damage control (internal and external) a month ago.

Also, let's look at some of his other recruits:
-Cooper - not so great
-Samuels - terrible
-Carrington - not a B10 player, honestly, probably not even a Summit league player
-Payne - very good recruit
-JOJ - very good recruit
-Henley - more downs than ups, and if word on the street is right, he may be leaving....so can we actually say he is a good recruiter...
Christie - could be good, time will tell

Other players:
-Garcia - one could argue he would've come back no matter who the coach was due to proximity to family
-Battle - had a good last year but this year has been extremely disappointing, is an average B10 player
-Loewe - average at best B10 player
-Payton Willis - good B10 player, but he was a unique case as he previously played at the U, then transferred away...and then boomeranged back...

Anyone who signs a LOI was successfully recruited. If they leave without enrolling you look for the reason. In the case of Evans, he either got discouraged by the horrible season that failed to show improvement or an offer of money.

I suspect both were factors but that the dismal season was the biggest issue.

 

[Dakota2]

Payne leaving would be grounds to reconsider giving Ben next year if I were Coyle.

It would.

 

[benlaur]

Anyone who signs a LOI was successfully recruited. If they leave without enrolling you look for the reason. In the case of Evans, he either got discouraged by the horrible season that failed to show improvement or an offer of money.

I suspect both were factors but that the dismal season was the biggest issue.

Dakota, you may want to check your definition of success. I would call it an obvious failure because it cost time and focus.

 

[Dakota2]

FWIW - factors to remember: Ben Johnson is a MN native and a former Gopher player.

if he was NOT a MN native and a former Gopher player, I think there would be a better chance of his being fired after this season - buyout or no buyout.

But because he is a MN native and a former Gopher player, that buys Johnson a 3rd year at the very least.

However, if by this time next year, the team has 2 or 3 conference wins and attendance is in the tank, I think Johnson is gone. I would put the odds of that at 65-70%.

All correct. Add to it this: If there are two or more departures among four freshmen and Christie, he is gone now.

 

[benlaur]

He is actually at 13.5% winning percentage right now. So there is about a 20% drop in winning percentage from Clem's first two seasons.

Clem never took last in the Big 10 and he won 20% more Big 10 games than CBJ. But you're right, Clem was pretty bad in his first two years, Ben has just been worse.

Bad comparison. Clem Haskins was hired with 6 years of prior head coaching experience. There was some understanding of what you were getting along with knowledge of some prior capacity to turn it around...which he did in year 3 while making the NCAA tournament.

 

[benlaur]

Bad comparison. Clem Haskins was hired with 6 years of prior head coaching experience. There was some understanding of what you were getting along with knowledge of some prior capacity to turn it around...which he did in year 3 while making the NCAA tournament.

Haskins also took over a program that was in complete disarray.

 

[cjbfbp]

He is actually at 13.5% winning percentage right now. So there is about a 20% drop in winning percentage from Clem's first two seasons.

Clem never took last in the Big 10 and he won 20% more Big 10 games than CBJ. But you're right, Clem was pretty bad in his first two years, Ben has just been worse.

Yes, the 13.5% is correct as I forgot to change the 14 to 16 when I copied the numbers down but the "20% more Big Ten wins" amounts to one more Big Ten win in two years.

There was almost no difference between their winning percentages (conference and overall) in those first two years so your claim of "much worse" is simply either erroneous or dishonest. Which one is it?

 

[cjbfbp]

Haskins also took over a program that was in complete disarray.

Johnson took over a program without a team. How much more "complete disarray" can you get than that? Haskins at least had about 4 holdovers and a freshman class that would later develop into starters and stars. Then Johnson had to deal with an almost completely new team in his second year.

Nobody ever expects Johnson to develop into Haskins but to suggest that he hasn't had as tough of starting circumstances as just about anyone is crazy.

 

[goldengophers]

Yes, the 13.5% is correct as I forgot to change the 14 to 16 when I copied the numbers down but the "20% more Big Ten wins" amounts to one more Big Ten win in two years.

There was almost no difference between their winning percentages (conference and overall) in those first two years so your claim of "much worse" is simply either erroneous or dishonest. Which one is it?

The answer is we are horrible and our golden goose flew the coop, there's little to grasp at here.

 

[GrampaGopher]

You make a good point that Ben gets major credit for recruiting Evans, building the relationship, and gaining his trust. That was phenomenal.

But I'm not sure all of the blame for his withdrawal can be laid to big NIL money.

Evans liked Ben. He made his own decision to play for Coach Johnson at the University of Minnesota. It is very possible he would have held firm against family pressure if only we could have shown something with this team. Had we been competitive in more games, won a handful in conference play, maybe it would have been enough.

Ben showed he can recruit at the highest level. But he didn't coach a competitive team. Evan's loss is partly on Ben.

Evans is linked to be headed to Louisville. It was not about wins and losses it was more about the Benjamin$.

 

[cjbfbp]

Bad comparison. Clem Haskins was hired with 6 years of prior head coaching experience. There was some understanding of what you were getting along with knowledge of some prior capacity to turn it around...which he did in year 3 while making the NCAA tournament.

Since you checked into this conversation late, let me explain it to you. No one is arguing that Ben Johnson was a comparable candidate to Clem Haskins. No one is that stupid.

The original argument was about whether Johnson deserved the very rare fate of being fired after two years (instead of having at least three). The other poster claimed that no one ever had a first two years like Johnson and that was wrong. Clem's first two years were almost identical.

 

[cjbfbp]

The answer is we are horrible and our golden goose flew the coop, there's little to grasp at here.

Yes, the team is pretty terrible but even coaches who perform terribly in their first two years normally are given at least three years. I don't care whether the scenario looks good for next season. The university should follow precedent and give Johnson at least one more chance. And they are very likely to do that anyway.

 

[GopherWeatherGuy]

Johnson took over a program without a team. How much more "complete disarray" can you get than that?

For the 1,000th time, no he didn't.

 

[benlaur]

Since you checked into this conversation late, let me explain it to you. No one is arguing that Ben Johnson was a comparable candidate to Clem Haskins. No one is that stupid.

The original argument was about whether Johnson deserved the very rare fate of being fired after two years (instead of having at least three). The other poster claimed that no one ever had a first two years like Johnson and that was wrong. Clem's first two years were almost identical.

If you are going to compare something, compare it in full otherwise it is foolish. Full context matters.

 

[benlaur]

Johnson took over a program without a team. How much more "complete disarray" can you get than that? Haskins at least had about 4 holdovers and a freshman class that would later develop into starters and stars. Then Johnson had to deal with an almost completely new team in his second year.

Nobody ever expects Johnson to develop into Haskins but to suggest that he hasn't had as tough of starting circumstances as just about anyone is crazy.

Haskins took over a program with a major cloud over it. Johnson took over an otherwise clean slate...a much better starting position.

Had the Gophers hired an experienced coach, would any players have transferred out the first year? We will never know.

Honesty is my policy and so far Johnson has had a rough start and that makes it difficult to sell because what history can he lean on? Basically you are selling playing time at this point.

Whatever the case, I hope he hits it out of the park.

 

[cjbfbp]

If you are going to compare something, compare it in full otherwise it is foolish. Full context matters.

No, it doesn't. The argument is only about whether Johnson deserves to be fired after two years instead of the normal minimum of three based on what we know today. This has nothing to do with whether Johnson should have been hired. He was hired so give him the usual minimum.

 

[topos]

This still remains one of the weirdest decisions of the season. I like JOJ, but there is no way he should be starting when Payne is not.

Thompson and Ramberg rounding out the starting lineup was the weirdest. It feels like that starting lineup was 10 years ago.