Thank You! Coach Johnson for Your Success Plan Underway!

[Johnnyboy18]

What would a bad job look like?

There's definitely worse P5 teams and throwing out 'historically bad' 2 games into the conference season is very premature. Bad start so far but haven't really lost to any bad teams like many other P5 teams.

 

[Crappie]

There's definitely worse P5 teams and throwing out 'historically bad' 2 games into the conference season is very premature. Bad start so far but haven't really lost to any bad teams like many other P5 teams.

Answer his question.

 

[Johnnyboy18]

Answer his question.

No

 

[Johnnyboy18]

What would a bad job look like?

A historically bad job would look like losing to the numerous awful teams we have played.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

There's definitely worse P5 teams and throwing out 'historically bad' 2 games into the conference season is very premature. Bad start so far but haven't really lost to any bad teams like many other P5 teams.

I never said there has never been a worse team than the Gophers.

So a bad job would just be the doing the worst possible job?

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

A historically bad job would look like losing to the numerous awful teams we have played.

I didn't ask about an historically bad job. I asked what a bad job looked like.

In your world there is historically bad and then it transitions right to good?

 

[Johnnyboy18]

I didn't ask about an historically bad job. I asked what a bad job looked like.

In your world there is historically bad and then it transitions right to good?

You've thrown out those two words multiple times. I think they are closer to an average team, than historically bad. Guess we'll find out over the next 2-3 months

 

[Johnnyboy18]

I never said there has never been a worse team than the Gophers.

So a bad job would just be the doing the worst possible job?

No, there's definitely a difference. By the way some posters talk I would assume the team is 0-12. Bad start? Yes, not the worst team of all time. Disappointing start? Yes, but season is not over yet. Throwing out phrases like 'historically bad' and talking about 0-20 is very dumb at the current moment no matter what some metrics say IMO

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

You've thrown out those two words multiple times. I think they are closer to an average team, than historically bad. Guess we'll find out over the next 2-3 months

Sure, but that wasn't my question. I asked what a bad job would look like and of course you refuse to answer. Any Ben Johnson apologist would have to refuse to answer that question. Thanks for making my point.

As to the rest of your point, you don't really believe that.

Winning zero games in the Big 10 would be historically bad.
Winning 10 games (10-10 in conference) would be average but we all know that you are going to call average will be like 40%? So lets call average in year 2 something like 8-12?

Lets bet. Lets set the over/under at 4 Big 10 wins. If they are under that, they'd be closer to historically bad than average.

$100

You in?

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

No, there's definitely a difference. By the way some posters talk I would assume the team is 0-12. Bad start? Yes, not the worst team of all time. Disappointing start? Yes, but season is not over yet. Throwing out phrases like 'historically bad' and talking about 0-20 is very dumb at the current moment no matter what some metrics say IMO

LOL. You really don't want to answer the question of what a "bad job looks like".

Like I said, it's okay. No Ben Johnson apologist would want to answer that question.

 

[Johnnyboy18]

Sure, but that wasn't my question. I asked what a bad job would look like and of course you refuse to answer. Any Ben Johnson apologist would have to refuse to answer that question. Thanks for making my point.

As to the rest of your point, you don't really believe that.

Winning zero games in the Big 10 would be historically bad.
Winning 10 games (10-10 in conference) would be average but we all know that you are going to call average will be like 40%? So lets call average in year 2 something like 8-12?

Lets bet. Lets set the over/under at 4 Big 10 wins. If they are under that, they'd be closer to historically bad than average.

$100

You in?

If it's a push no money is exchanged? Deal

 

[Johnnyboy18]

LOL. You really don't want to answer the question of what a "bad job looks like".

Like I said, it's okay. No Ben Johnson apologist would want to answer that question.

Sure, bad job in the current season 12 games in. Also stupidly didn't bring another CG/SG when players were interested. I've said that prior because I'm objective. Also said similar things about PJ in 2017/2018.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

Sure bad job in the current season 12 games in. Also stupidly didn't bring another CG/SG when players were interested.

LOL. Then what's your disagreement with my post? The poster said "Ben Johnson is doing a very good job and you're too stupid to see it" so I asked him what a bad job would look like.

We're in agreement, so far this year, it does not seem like he's doing a good job.

If we end up winning 6 games in the Big 10 this year, I will gladly say that I think that's about where I thought we'd end up this year and it's part of the process. If we win 1-2 games this year, it's a failure. I hope it's the former, but we'll see.

 

[Johnnyboy18]

LOL. Then what's your disagreement with my post? The poster said "Ben Johnson is doing a very good job and you're too stupid to see it" so I asked him what a bad job would look like.

We're in agreement, so far this year, it does not seem like he's doing a good job.

If we end up winning 6 games in the Big 10 this year, I will gladly say that I think that's about where I thought we'd end up this year and it's part of the process. If we win 1-2 games this year, it's a failure. I hope it's the former, but we'll see.

Agreed bad job so far this year.

Take issue with the historically bad talk and 0-20 talk. Also take issue with posters pretending the season is over 2 games into the conference season.

 

[Gopherfan84]

Sure, but that wasn't my question. I asked what a bad job would look like and of course you refuse to answer. Any Ben Johnson apologist would have to refuse to answer that question. Thanks for making my point.

As to the rest of your point, you don't really believe that.

Winning zero games in the Big 10 would be historically bad.
Winning 10 games (10-10 in conference) would be average but we all know that you are going to call average will be like 40%? So lets call average in year 2 something like 8-12?

Lets bet. Lets set the over/under at 4 Big 10 wins. If they are under that, they'd be closer to historically bad than average.

$100

You in?

.500 in conference for our program would be really good for us. We’ve surpassed that 3 times in the last 22 years lol. Just a semantics argument more than anything. That’s why 8 wins is probably really fair for us to consider a decent season. We’ve got work to do here.

 

[Johnnyboy18]

LOL. Then what's your disagreement with my post? The poster said "Ben Johnson is doing a very good job and you're too stupid to see it" so I asked him what a bad job would look like.

We're in agreement, so far this year, it does not seem like he's doing a good job.

If we end up winning 6 games in the Big 10 this year, I will gladly say that I think that's about where I thought we'd end up this year and it's part of the process. If we win 1-2 games this year, it's a failure. I hope it's the former, but we'll see.

Also, not an apologist. Way too early to be an apologist for anyone. If I'm defending bad records in 3 years than maybe. Think it's way too early to be an apologist for any coach. I defended PJ teams playing bad in '17/'18 because I knew the circumstances of the seasons. Hopefully Ben has similar breakthrough later in the season as PJ did against Wisconsin.

 

[Spaulding!No!]

If the team is as bad as the 2000 Northwestern team Ben will know before the rest of us.

 

[MennoSota]

What would a bad job look like?

We would know if you were the coach.

 

[Wet_Blanket_Guy]

They only have two guy's back from last year, and yes Thompson is measurably better defensively than he was last year. I expect the same from this years freshman class. As players get accustomed to each other offensively they will naturally improve, you can't have a new team every year and expect to win unless you have dominating natural ability which the Gophers will never have.

I didn’t say anything about winning. We can still improve team offensive / defensive metrics and still not win (but that would be considered an improvement).

I’ll make it crystal clear, I did not expect to more than a .333 winning percentage in the B10. Additionally, I expected the following in non-conference:

-6-0 against cream puffs (Chicago state, Arkansas PB, western Michigan, st Francis Brooklyn, Central Michigan, Cal-Baptist. Combined we won (393-346). That is not really an acceptable margin when you realize we beat St. Francis by 18 and Arkansas PB by 16, meaning the other four games our combined margin of victory was 13 points. *I give the Michigan some leeway in losing to Central Michigan as that is essentially Central Michigan’s Super Bowl.

- I expected us to be a coin toss against UNLV. While they are guard heavy (a weakness for us, which is well documented) I figured our size could grind on them in an early season game. It was a blow out and the final score does not actually represent what actually happened (we were destroyed)

You've thrown out those two words multiple times. I think they are closer to an average team, than historically bad. Guess we'll find out over the next 2-3 months

an average team can potentially go winless in conference…wow. Hate to see a bad team in your mind.

 

[Crappie]

.500 in conference for our program would be really good for us. We’ve surpassed that 3 times in the last 22 years lol. Just a semantics argument more than anything. That’s why 8 wins is probably really fair for us to consider a decent season. We’ve got work to do here.

I think it's time to stop thinking in terms of "our program ".
Average would be 10-10.

 

[Ogee Ogilthorpe]

I think it's time to stop thinking in terms of "our program ".
Average would be 10-10.

No shit. Generally speaking, when you make a coaching change you're looking for the next guy to do better than the last guy. I guess time are changing though, goalposts moving, that kind of thing?

 

[MNJay]

And several more are communists, Senator McCarthy.

McCarthy was right.

 

[BarnBurner]

No shit. Generally speaking, when you make a coaching change you're looking for the next guy to do better than the last guy. I guess time are changing though, goalposts moving, that kind of thing?

Agreed. High time for MN to not be "special" any longer.

 

[Gopherfan84]

I think it's time to stop thinking in terms of "our program ".
Average would be 10-10.

Sure that’s fine and is the correct goal, but it doesn’t change history. I think many fans think we are closer to Iowa or even Wisconsin, but sadly we are closer to Penn State and Nebraska.
Our turnaround will look different than an Indiana.

 

[Crappie]

Sure that’s fine and is the correct goal, but it doesn’t change history. I think many fans think we are closer to Iowa or even Wisconsin, but sadly we are closer to Penn State and Nebraska.
Our turnaround will look different than an Indiana.

Is anyone, anyone saying anything about changing the history of Mn bb? No.

Many of us on this forum understand it very, very well.

To me it doesn't matter who Mn is "close" to with respect to other conference teams. Is that a new data point you can measure?

Have a successful program, win, graduate kids, etc.

Be Minnesota Basketball.

 

[Gopherfan84]

Is anyone, anyone saying anything about changing the history of Mn bb? No.

Many of us on this forum understand it very, very well.

To me it doesn't matter who Mn is "close" to with respect to other conference teams. Is that a new data point you can measure?

Have a successful program, win, graduate kids, etc.

Be Minnesota Basketball.

Just a fact when we look at what it will most likely take for us to change from the crap we’ve been. It probably won’t be instant is all. Shouldn’t be this bad as well, but won’t be instant either. I don’t like it either, but it’s not like professional sports where they redistribute talent to poor teams (the draft). It’s a rich get richer and they work hard to keep others out (as they should). It’s just not that easy to move up a tier in program status (which is dictated by the amount of wins).

100% agree we need to be Minnesota basketball and have an identity. That will be the start to the turnaround whenever it happens.

 

[Crappie]

Just a fact when we look at what it will most likely take for us to change from the crap we’ve been. It probably won’t be instant is all. Shouldn’t be this bad as well, but won’t be instant either. I don’t like it either, but it’s not like professional sports where they redistribute talent to poor teams (the draft). It’s a rich get richer and they work hard to keep others out (as they should). It’s just not that easy to move up a tier in program status (which is dictated by the amount of wins).

100% agree we need to be Minnesota basketball and have an identity. That will be the start to the turnaround whenever it happens.

What fact? History prevents a quick turnaround? Or?

Stop with the excuses, and yes that is what your posting.

 

[Gopherfan84]

What fact? History prevents a quick turnaround? Or?

Yes history of a program certainly can correlate with how quick a program turns around. I don’t know how that’s even something that is debatable. You can argue the portal has helped shorten it and that’s true, but it still likely will take longer for consistent success.

Stop with the excuses, and yes that is what you’re posting.

it’s only an excuse for it not happening quickly. I’m not excusing better results not happening.

 

[Bob_Loblaw]

We would know if you were the coach.

Yep, I wouldn’t be a very good college basketball coach. I’ve never done it. I would have been a terrible hire, hell, even Montana and Northern Illinois would have turned me down.

Sick burn though!

 

[Crappie]

Yes history of a program certainly can correlate with how quick a program turns around. I don’t know how that’s even something that is debatable. You can argue the portal has helped shorten it and that’s true, but it still likely will take longer for consistent success.

it’s only an excuse for it not happening quickly. I’m not excusing better results not happening.

Searching for reasons/excuses why mn bb is in the current situation, that is what isn't debatable.

History is history. You're using it as a crutch here. Examples of success rather quickly are available.