My question would be who is gonna replace him?Saban
Got a list of potential candidates?
I have no doubt that if you researched each of Izzo's seasons you'd find one where his team's KenPom "Luck" ranking was pretty low.MSU is #357 out of #362 this year
My question would be who is gonna replace him?I don't have a list and frankly I don't care. I started (Exhibit A) with a comparison of Holtmann's performance to the program average. Holtmann is clearly below the program average and therefore:
Got a list of potential candidates?
Thus, my view is that if your guy is below your program's average you should move on. Even if you get it wrong, just try again. OTOH, if the current guy is ahead of your program's average, you should keep him. Holtmann is clearly behind my program's average and should be cashiered without delay.The average coach at Ohio State wins the league about every four years. The average coach at Ohio State makes it beyond the first weekend of the NCAA Tournament about once every four years. The average coach at Ohio State makes it to the Elite Eight about once every seven years. Holtmann is nowhere close to that. Consequently, the average coach would be a major improvement. Bring me the average coach!
As I said in the earlier post, I believe that coaching hires are more art than science. I don't think there is a sure-fire formula. What I do know is that the average hire is average and Holtmann isn't so the new hire has a better than 50/50 chance of being better than Holtmann. I'll take those odds.Yep. I've said in the past that one of the things that annoys me most about fan bases is when they have a successful coach (success defined similar to you, performance relative to program average) but they think he's not successful enough, so they want the coach that's going to take them to "the next level."
Exhibit C, Holtmann January:
Holtmann's defenders have said that he inherited a mess. That excuse obviously gets old. This is his seventh year, not his second. More importantly, the best team Holtmann ever coached was his first, the 2017/18 Buckeyes.
I'd like to hear from the two voters who said "no".I haven’t voted, but I would vote no because Michigan gets to fire Juwan first. The program couldn’t look more different from what Beilein built
I've listed my reasons, I don't see any reason to continue Holtmann's employment but I'm open to hearing your explanations.
Holtmann's consistent January slump is one of the odder trends in all of sports. And given the Buckeyes' last two games, it's happening again. Are you able to post a year-by-year list of Holtmann's January slumps? THX!I don't have one but I guess I should have included that since it is an issue in discussion in this thread so here goes:
No.I can understand this logic but if I were Gene Smith I'd certainly be conducting my search because the necessity is increasingly obvious.
It’s January, and there’s no point in doing it today. He’ll either dig his own grave or he won’t. Seems like he will, right now. So when he does, make the move.
One thing I don't see mentioned is the only reason Holtmann wasn't fired last year is b/c the rushed decision to extend his contract makes it too much of an immediate financial hit to fire Holtmann when he should be fired.Unfortunately Gene Smith made a HUMONGOUS mistake in giving an extension with a big buyout to an underperforming coach a few years ago. At the time I thought it was a mistake and the passage of time has only made it more and more obvious that it was a mistake.
IMO, the threshold for keeping Holtmann is 24 wins. 24 wins and Holtmann should likely get another year. 24 wins to include 1 tournament win and Holtmann should certainly get another year. OSU has much work to do for 24 wins.
Holtmann also won +20 games in his first five seasons, so whatever situation he was left with wasn't so backbreaking or persistently detrimental. OSU after Thad Matta certainly wasn't the mess Louisville is currently fighting to clean up.
Exhibit A, Ohio State's history as a program:
There were 33 seasons from expansion (1985) to the last year before Holtmann came to tOSU (2016/17). In those 33 seasons the Buckeyes had five different coaches Miller, Williams, Ayers, O'Brien, and Matta) and accomplished the following:.
- 18 NCAA Tournament appearances, a little better than one every two years.
- 9 league titles, a little better than one every four years.
- 8 S16's, not quite one every four years.
- 5 E8's, a little better than one every seven years.
- 3 F4's, one every 11 years
Honestly, I can't think of a single reason where you would fire Holtmann midseason, when they've been a pretty decent team. The idea makes no sense. You do that when things have gone hopelessly south or there is some sort of scandal, or there is some benefit in hiring someone new. OSU doesn't really even have a athletic director yet, so none of those things exist here.I gotta say this for you Max, you are consistent! Failed season after failed season you still stand behind our failed coach.
I gotta say this for you Max, you are consistent! Failed season after failed season you still stand behind our failed coach.I mean...who cares? We are talking about firing Holtmann for results of games that haven't occurred yet. This is basic Buckeye behavior, I've also fielded a million tweets about how Ryan Day should be fired based on things that haven't happened. I don't disagree with your basic premise - the results haven't been good enough.
@SuperMario (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1596) thinks that Ohio State will win in Ann Arbor on Monday, I assume that you agree with him. I think that you are both underestimating the ability of a Chris Holtmann team to suck in the month of January.
Based on Holtmann's pathetic history, the safe assumption is that the Buckeyes will lose in Ann Arbor on Monday. Then next Saturday they will probably lose at home to the worst team in the league for the second consecutive season.
Losing at home last year to the worst team in the league (Minnesota) was the last straw for me. I said then that Holtmann should have been fired that day and events since then have made and are making me into Nostradomus.
I don't disagree with your basic premise - the results haven't been good enough.I'm glad we are on the same page there.
The main issue has been defensive issues. They started out noticeably better but have struggled a bit lately. They are also a very young team that start four sophomores and one senior transfer. Some struggles should be expected. Either they will pull out of it or they won't. They have before.If this were Holtmann's second or third year or if he'd had a level of success reasonably comparable to tOSU's average program history in his first six then I think these points would be worth considering but:
the team is pretty good.No, they are not.
They are currently 28th on Torvik and 42nd on KenPom. This isn't some debate - they are an above average team. I would want them to finish in the top 25 this year to feel confident about next season. They aren't far off.The current losing streak is two games. How long would it have to get before you changed you mind on this?
But this is academic. There is no good reason to fire Holtmann during the season. None. The very idea is silly. It shouldn't happen for a variety of reasons that are obvious, it won't happen for even more reasons that are obvious, so why are we even talking about it? Enjoy the team or don't.
The current losing streak is two games. How long would it have to get before you changed you mind on this?This isn't, in any way, how I enjoy the team, nor do I think anyone could enjoy any sporting event ever if their primary focus is on what parameters should be set to fire people on the team.
As much as I want a competitive coach, I can see this point for now. However, if this losing streak grows to four games, then, Holtmann is a dead man walking and there is no longer any reason to keep him.
I say this because, as I said above, the next two games a critical because they *SHOULD* be winnable (@M, vPSU) and if they lose these, they are screwed.
This isn't, in any way, how I enjoy the team, nor do I think anyone could enjoy any sporting event ever if their primary focus is on what parameters should be set to fire people on the team.It is not enjoyable which is why nobody is going to the games. It should have been dealt with long ago but wasn't. Now here we are.
It is not enjoyable which is why nobody is going to the games. It should have been dealt with long ago but wasn't. Now here we are.It is worth noting - this is not a basketball city.
It is worth noting - this is not a basketball city.I definitely think that randomness is up but I don't think that parity is.
I do think the more interesting convo is whether college basketball has increased in parity and therefore increased in randomness. How does one compare this era to previous eras?
I definitely think that randomness is up but I don't think that parity is.This I agree with. However, I think the transfer portal has really affected basketball teams. They only have 13 scholarships, and it used to be difficult to plan for guys leaving unexpectedly. Now, it is very easy for teams to fill out entire rosters, and also very difficult to hold onto players for any length of time. Like the laws of thermodynamics - all the players more or less funnel to better situations and so all the teams end up much closer together than they used to be.
The emphasis on three point shooting inherently increases randomness because even the best shooters have cold nights.
Let me put it this way:
If you were say 6" taller than me and more athletic, you are ALWAYS going to be a better post player than me, no exceptions.
OTOH, if you shoot 35% from three and I shoot 25% from three you are clearly a better shooter but a good night for me is probably better than a bad night for you so in a series of three point shooting contests I will occasionally win.
It is not enjoyable which is why nobody is going to the games. It should have been dealt with long ago but wasn't. Now here we are.This actually works against firing him early. You fire people early for reasons of PR or for football recruiting.
There's another reason to fire early--if the coach (and fans/etc) think a coach is on such a hot seat that he's "coaching for his job", and then he performs, it's a LOT worse getting rid of him.This.
Think of the 2012 Purdue football team. It became Danny Hope's last year as HC. He was 3-6 through nine games and they were already inscribing the tombstone. The team then rallied to narrow wins against Iowa and Illinois, then beat Indiana by ~20 to reach 6-6 and bowl eligibility.
And then he was fired immediately following the Indiana win, and an interim coach was the HC for the bowl.
It seemed like a dick move, to be honest. If you've made the decision when he's 3-6 that he's gone after the season, fire him at 3-6 and turn the team over to the interim. Not firing him and then watching him celebrate as his team reels off three wins thinking he might save his job is just giving him false hope (pun intended).
So if you believe Holtmann deserves to go after this season (barring a F4 or NC or some crazy level success), it's better to do it sooner than later--if for nothing else, because sneaking into the tournament and getting a R64 win and then losing in the R32 just makes your decision harder.
The loss as a #2 seed to a #15 seed was awful. That would be ok if there were offsetting good wins but there aren't. Izzo, Coach K, and other greats lost to a #15 as a #2 but Holtmann is no Izzo.
Looking over that season's wikipedia page, Ohio State spent from February 4th on ranked in the Top Ten. So that might explain it. But they ended their conference schedule with FOUR straight losses. Which begs the question, why were the Buckeyes consistently ranked so high despite another otherwise average run? Maybe the shakeup of a weird COVID season?COVID and a good schedule. They finished with more Q1 and Q2 wins than the national champ.
Anyway, here I am on MLK day, watching Ohio State basketball currently down at the half to a 6-10 Michigan team. Holtmann's January slumping rolls on!
they've been a pretty decent team.I guess, more than anything else, this is where you and I fundamentally disagree and honestly I don't know what makes you think this. They looked like a good team early with a bunch of wins against crap opponents and a nice upset of Alabama but presently they do not even resemble a good team. Note that Lunardi has them down to needing to win a play-in to make the field. Starting with the PSU catastrophe on December 9, here is their resume with NET then KenPom ranking for each opponent:
This I agree with. However, I think the transfer portal has really affected basketball teams. They only have 13 scholarships, and it used to be difficult to plan for guys leaving unexpectedly. Now, it is very easy for teams to fill out entire rosters, and also very difficult to hold onto players for any length of time. Like the laws of thermodynamics - all the players more or less funnel to better situations and so all the teams end up much closer together than they used to be.My first reaction was that I completely agreed with this, but then a thought hit me... haven't basketball coaches been facing that since the mid 2000's when the NBA changed their draft rules? THe portal is probably an additional layer and I guess it probably does impact fringe programs the most. The top tier bball schools have just grown accustomed to talent leaving and having to reload immediately with the best HS seniors in the country.
This I agree with. However, I think the transfer portal has really affected basketball teams. They only have 13 scholarships, and it used to be difficult to plan for guys leaving unexpectedly. Now, it is very easy for teams to fill out entire rosters, and also very difficult to hold onto players for any length of time. Like the laws of thermodynamics - all the players more or less funnel to better situations and so all the teams end up much closer together than they used to be.BTW this would invalidate your argument excusing him for mediocre performance this year b/c he has a young team, i.e. 4 sophomores starting.
BTW this would invalidate your argument excusing him for mediocre performance this year b/c he has a young team, i.e. 4 sophomores starting.That isn't my point. My point is that "mediocre" is a pretty wide net now. OSU is sucking right now and has still been roughly the fifth best team in the Big Ten by advanced stats. Since it is so easy to fill rosters now, parity has increased quite a bit. Filling rosters used to a be a big challenge and the primary difference between the haves and have-nots. Now, every team can fill out a competent roster and every player can find a better situation.
Especially since sophomores aren't that "young" in modern college basketball...
If the sophomores aren't good enough to start yet, it's a recruiting issue. And not bringing in more transfers to support them if you know they're not good enough yet is a failure of roster management. Especially since he's been there long enough to have "his" guys.
That isn't my point. My point is that "mediocre" is a pretty wide net now. OSU is sucking right now and has still been roughly the fifth best team in the Big Ten by advanced stats. Since it is so easy to fill rosters now, parity has increased quite a bit. Filling rosters used to a be a big challenge and the primary difference between the haves and have-nots. Now, every team can fill out a competent roster and every player can find a better situation.A "coin flip" league is one thing if you look at a single game sample size. But over a larger sample, if you're coming up tails more than heads too often relative to expectations, you're simply not performing. At some point it's not merely bad luck with the way the coin flipped.
Sort of like seeing the NFL playoffs where the Eagles and Cowboys (and Browns) get trounced by supposedly inferior teams. The NFL has become a coinflip league in a lot of ways and college basketball is looking like that too.
A "coin flip" league is one thing if you look at a single game sample size. But over a larger sample, if you're coming up tails more than heads too often relative to expectations, you're simply not performing. At some point it's not merely bad luck with the way the coin flipped.Right, no argument there. My question is how do you compare the environment, right now, with the environment 10 or 20 or 50 years ago.
I think Medina's point is that Holtmann is consistently underperforming expectations (program averages). I don't think he's basing this on individual games or even individual seasons.
Right, no argument there. My question is how do you compare the environment, right now, with the environment 10 or 20 or 50 years ago.As with all things, you compare relative to the competition. The environment is always changing. Everyone in basketball is dealing with the same environment right now.
A "coin flip" league is one thing if you look at a single game sample size. But over a larger sample, if you're coming up tails more than heads too often relative to expectations, you're simply not performing. At some point it's not merely bad luck with the way the coin flipped.Exactly. I'll add that randomness and parity are NOT exactly the same thing.
I'll add that randomness and parity are NOT exactly the same thing.True, but randomness is going to increase if there is more parity. Which is why I'm interested in how we compare separate eras. We also are hitting the end of the COVID super seniors. Helpful to teams that have them.
I was wondering how this thread would go. It has become a great topic and discussion. I think @medinabuckeye1 (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1547) used data to best demonstrate a position so far. There's a difference between a 35% and 25% shooter and random nights happen. That's a great demonstration of his position on this topic and honestly was such a great moment of "wow" I get exactly what he's saying now.Thanks.
But over a larger sample, if you're coming up tails more than heads too often relative to expectations, you're simply not performing.There are still a lot of familiar names in the S16 each year. MSU is still generally pretty good most years.
I was wondering how this thread would go. It has become a great topic and discussion. I think @medinabuckeye1 (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1547) used data to best demonstrate a position so far. There's a difference between a 35% and 25% shooter and random nights happen. That's a great demonstration of his position on this topic and honestly was such a great moment of "wow" I get exactly what he's saying now.That's what I've been saying is way more responsible for the randomness of college basketball than roster continuity all along. The analytics support doing it, and that's where Beilein was ahead of the curve, but at the NBA level, the rates are WAY more predictable than in college.
I personally hate it, I think it makes the game less watchable. But I'm not sure what the fix is. I think a start is to keep the 3 point line consistent all the way around, so it eventually runs out of bounds, and you eliminate the corner 3.I have a theory but it is so radical that it would never get serious consideration.
I have a theory but it is so radical that it would never get serious consideration.I also think the court is too small, and we started rewarding taking charges. So why would you ever drive? There is barely any room, and as long as a guy can slide over, with zero intention to defend, before you can plant, the foul will be on you
Shooters have gotten so good that the 50% bonus for a long-range shot is simply too much. The fix is to make a regular shot worth three and a long-range shot worth four. Then the bonus is only 33.3% instead of 50%.
That actually isn't the radical part. The radical part is that, in conjunction with the above, the rim should be raised to 11'. When John Naismith invented the game in 1891 he was 5' 10-1/2" and he was considerably taller than the average American man. My guess is that six footers were rarer at Springfield College in 1891 than seven footers are in today's NBA.
As players got taller and better at jumping the inside game went from trying to get a good shot to just a dunking contest. The three point shot helped but then everybody figured out that 3>2.
At this point the game is largely 3's and dunks but that makes sense because why should you try anything else?
If you cut the long-range bonus to 33.3% and make dunks into something that only a few guys in the league can do then you'll bring back the midrange game, I think.
I also think the court is too small, and we started rewarding taking charges. So why would you ever drive? There is barely any room, and as long as a guy can slide over, with zero intention to defend, before you can plant, the foul will be on youAs radical as my proposed changes are, this would be an order of magnitude more difficult to institute.
The three point shot is the most successful gimmick in sports history. I'm not sure there is any getting rid of it, and if we are talking about changing the sport now I'd start with getting rid of intentional fouling and timeouts.Elon ending
I would take what is now a charging a play on. 95% of charging calls are where a defender is making no attempt to actually play defense. He looks more like he's trying to block a free kickSo an offensive player can simply run over a defensive player?
Elon endingI watched a bit of the Elam Ending in The Basketball Tournament. I understand they have used it in the G League, which I haven't seen. I can't say I loved it, though that could be in part that it is so different from anything else that I just wasn't used to it. A clock does make things more exciting, but it could be I'm just very used to a clock. I enjoy soccer and the doofy extra time, so perhaps I could get used to the Elam Ending too.
I think they've done a good job trimming timeouts. Now get rid of automatic reviews, and tie them all to coaches challenges, with a timeout as the cost for losing it. And if you are out of timeouts, you can't challenge
So an offensive player can simply run over a defensive player?I would keep charging where the offensive player initiates contact, for the purpose of creating contact. But if the offensive player is attempting to score, and they can go right through a defender to do so, I'd make that a play on. If they score, they score, if not, that's the defender doing his job.
Or, as something we actually see quite a bit called as charging, an offensive player can lower a shoulder into a defensive player, knock him on his butt, and then pull up for a short jumper?
Or are you saying that you'll keep charging in the rule book, but not call a charge when a player is "looking for the call" in the way that players do now?
I'm not saying getting rid of charging is a bad idea... Just asking some questions logistically how it'll work because I can see a lot of complexities in how it would actually play out in real games...
Edit: Or another one--a post player who just bumps and bumps and bumps a player trying to play good defense, backing him down to score... At some point isn't that charging?
It all comes down to two things: are you getting the talent to succeed relative to expectations, and are you getting the most out of that talent and actually succeeding relative to those same expectations?FWIW:
The three point shot is the most successful gimmick in sports history. I'm not sure there is any getting rid of it, and if we are talking about changing the sport now I'd start with getting rid of intentional fouling and timeouts.
@ELA (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=55) and/or @847badgerfan (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=5) could we move the proposed changes to BB discussion to a separate thread? I think that it is a good and an interesting discussion but, as I see it, there are two problems with it being in this thread:I dunno. I think people come for the drama and stay for the discussion about basketball theory.
- I would guess that a lot of posters haven't seen it because they are tired of seeing @MaximumSam (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1572) and I debate Coach Holtmann so they've just ignored this thread. I created this thread specifically to put it somewhere that those who aren't interested could ignore it. That is all well and good but now we have a completely unrelated discussion that some of them might be interested in buried deep within this.
- It is only tangentially related to the Holtmann discussion so for the posters who ARE interested in THAT discussion it is now buried in a discussion of rim height, the three point shot, charging, and court size.
The success of the three point shot has also entirely taken away a part of the game that was celebrated two decades ago, the mid-range jumper. 15 - 18ft shots are frowned upon now, both analytically and by most offensive system coaches.I also miss the midrange game but I don't fault coaches. I'm a data guy and it ALWAYS bothered me to see guys take a long 2 because I figured that you can't possibly be materially better from 22' than you are from 24' so why take a 22' shot for 2 when you could take a 24' shot for 3? Even the 15-18' shots that you mentioned only make sense if you are 50% better from 15-18' than you are from 23'9" and I would guess that basically nobody is.
I agree with ELA. Beyond the changes to the game, the court just "feels" small, especially along the baseline. Adding 3-4 ft to baselines would facilitate more freedom of movement, allow for an extension of the three point line on the baselines.
I don't watch it because from a competition standpoint any particular game is almost completely meaningless.I agree with this 100%. Any league that sends >50% of their teams to the playoffs has a meaningless regular season.
I agree with this 100%. Any league that sends >50% of their teams to the playoffs has a meaningless regular season.Eh. For me it's just that the NBA and MLB have so many games.
Tying this to CFB, I fear that the 12-team playoff will essentially achieve this for the "Kings" in CFB.
The success of the three point shot has also entirely taken away a part of the game that was celebrated two decades ago, the mid-range jumper. 15 - 18ft shots are frowned upon now, both analytically and by most offensive system coaches.I’m gonna be honest, I think the mid-range jumper is kind of overrated historically. It’s also not a bad shot these days as much as it’s reserved for better players.
I agree with ELA. Beyond the changes to the game, the court just "feels" small, especially along the baseline. Adding 3-4 ft to baselines would facilitate more freedom of movement, allow for an extension of the three point line on the baselines.
Honestly, I can't think of a single reason where you would fire Holtmann midseason, when they've been a pretty decent team. The idea makes no sense. You do that when things have gone hopelessly south or there is some sort of scandal, or there is some benefit in hiring someone new. OSU doesn't really even have a athletic director yet, so none of those things exist here.Allow me to present:
Look up Lamont Paris. Good background.I'm vaguely familiar with his story. He is almost exactly six months older than me and played CBB at Wooster College which is a small College not far from me.
I'm vaguely familiar with his story. He is almost exactly six months older than me and played CBB at Wooster College which is a small College not far from me.He recruited Ohio well for Bo Ryan and Greg Gard.
How is this even a discussion at this point? Is Holtmann your cousin?You are conflating what you want to happen with what is likely to happen.
You are conflating what you want to happen with what is likely to happen.I've laid out a very detailed case as to what is likely to happen.
I've laid out a very detailed case as to what is likely to happen.I think that last part is a bit of a gambler’s fallacy. And the “vastly“ part might be a little bit of an overstatement.
The next coach has a 50/50 chance to be as good or better than the average Ohio State BB coach and the average Ohio State BB coach over the past ~40 years has been VASTLY superior to the current coach.
Look up Lamont Paris. Good background.I have friends in SC. I hope his time there doesn’t end quite so fast.
Exactly. A young team makes sense if you're a relatively new coach trying to rebuild a program. A young team makes sense if you're an 7th year coach coming off a banner year where you sent a bunch of experienced players to the NBA / graduation after a successful year and it's time to rebuild in their wake.
If this were Holtmann's third or fourth year I'd be interested in a discussion/debate about thus being a young team and how that experience might look next year under him.
This isn't Holtmann's third or fourth year. He has had seven years to figure things out
He recruited Ohio well for Bo Ryan and Greg Gard.Hopefully he is already under consideration by Gene Smith and/or Ross Bjork. It is reasonable to assume at thus point that the AD is looking at options because the current BB coach's underperformance is not improving and the current season is hovering between merely "bad" and "horrible". Either one of those outcomes would clearly be unacceptable for a seventh year coach with ZERO notable accomplishments.
That being said, Chris is committing the modern program crime of two non-tournament seasons, and that’ll get you.Matta took us to multiple F4's and four straight S16's and got fired when he missed consecutive tournaments so yeah, that is a firing offense.
I've laid out a very detailed case as to what is likely to happen.I mean, maybe. I really have no clue. Gene Smith has been a big Holtmann supporter, and I know nothing about Bjork other than he sort of just follows the wind. The wind is against Holtmann, but Columbus isn't a basketball town so it's more of a light breeze. I don't really have a thought as to what is likely to happen. A key part of Holtmann's appeal is his ability to field a competent tourney team with a collection of randos, but that doesn't work if he misses the tourney twice. OTOH, Bjork just got here and OSU still has a competent team that could return lots of guys next season, and he may not want to blow that up.
The next coach has a 50/50 chance to be as good or better than the average Ohio State BB coach and the average Ohio State BB coach over the past ~40 years has been VASTLY superior to the current coach.
Allow me to present:The above is absolutely NOT "a competent team".
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/game/_/gameId/401600303/buckeyes-nittany-lions
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/game/_/gameId/401600315/buckeyes-hoosiers
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/game/_/gameId/401600323/badgers-buckeyes
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/game/_/gameId/401600333/buckeyes-wolverines
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/game/_/gameId/401600347/buckeyes-cornhuskers
Things have gone hopelessly south. This season is irrevocably lost. We are seven years Holtmann's tenure and we have a crappy team for the second year in a row, we haven't been close to a B1G title since 2018, and we haven't made it beyond the first weekend of of the NCAA Tournament in a decade.
I would assume that Bjork and Smith talk about what they want to happen and make decisions like that collaboratively.This I agree with.
Smith has vocally been very supportive of Holtmann and I can only assume is saying that to Bjork right now.I agree that Smith has been supportive publicly but that is utterly meaningless to me. AD's are typically publicly supportive right up until the moment of termination. I think it just comes with the territory.
You can say the season is lost, but in reality it isn't - if they go on a winning streak and make the tourney I doubt they will fire the coach.This is just silly and/or delusional.
If they don't make the tourney, I don't have a feeling one way or another.Seriously?
The difference between this and Matta is that Matta was losing with veteran teams and the program was a mess. This team isn't veteran and the program isn't a mess, so the vibe is different.On this my view could not be more different than yours. Here you are, once again, referencing the allegedly "young team". I couldn't care less. As @betarhoalphadelta (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=19) and I have said repeatedly, Holtmann is not a new coach and he isn't in rebuilding mode coming off of a great season. He is in year seven, he has NEVER had a great season, and last year was historically bad.
Holtmann is not a new coach and he isn't in rebuilding mode coming off of a great season. He is in year seven, he has NEVER had a great season, and last year was historically bad.I think Matt Painter is an interesting comparison as came up in the earlier thread. There was a lot of question of whether to get rid of him after the 2013-2014 season. Two straight missed tournaments culminating in finishing last in the league. Painter had an even longer run, and had just finished his 9th year, so again this isn't a "new" coach scenario. In the "what have you done for me lately?" accounting, he hadn't done much.
The relevant difference isn't the age of the teams. The relevant difference is that Matta had a history of success as a BB coach and Holtmann has a history of mediocrity as a BB coach.
If you keep a previously successful coach like Matta there is a chance that he *MIGHT* return to his previous greatness. If you keep a previously mediocre (at best) coach like Holtmann, the more-or-less best-case-scenario is that he'll return to his previous mediocrity.
Seriously?I'm talking about what I think would happen, not what I personally think
You are ok with our alma mater paying $10M a year to a guy for results they could get for half that from any random halfway competent coach?
I think that last part is a bit of a gambler’s fallacy. And the “vastly“ part might be a little bit of an overstatement.I think the "gambler's fallacy" would be to compare to the best periods in program history. I'm not doing that and I went to great lengths to avoid that. I'm comparing to the ~40 years since tournament expansion and if you went back much further Holtmann would look even worse by comparison because you'd start getting back into Fred Taylor's glory days.
Can anyone watching the Buckeyes embarass themselves in Evanston explain why Gene Smith shouldn't fire Chris Holtmann TONIGHT?
Because of Gene Smith himself. It is Gene Smith who made the preemptive decision to saddle Ohio State to Chris Holtmann with a costly extension. Holtmann is not only expensive to get rid of but to do so would appear as an admission of guilt by Gene Smith who everyone knows is the sole decider on Holtmann.You are right of course. Gene Smith's catastrophic decision to extend a coach with a mediocre (that is VERY charitable) record now leaves us here.
Honestly, I can't think of a single reason where you would fire Holtmann midseason, when they've been a pretty decent team. The idea makes no sense. You do that when things have gone hopelessly south or there is some sort of scandal, or there is some benefit in hiring someone new. OSU doesn't really even have a athletic director yet, so none of those things exist here.Still think we have a pretty decent team?
If I were the AD, I'd have put him on a back of the plane middle seat coach flight home and not let him see the team ever again.Exactly. This loss was embarrassing and it is 100% on the seventh year HC.
Still think we have a pretty decent team?So no, the team wasn't competent, though I also don't agree things have gone hopelessly south. That's just the nature of the sport.
Losing for the fifth time in six games with that loss being the complete embarrassment of getting run out of the gym in Evanston more-or-less defines "things have gone hopelessly south", no?
So no, the team wasn't competent, though I also don't agree things have gone hopelessly south. That's just the nature of the sport.LoL
LoLBlame basketball, not me. I just call 'em as I see 'em. If they hit threes in their home games people will wonder what Holtmann did to change things up.
Is there any level of failure that will convince you that the Chris Holtmann era is a failure?
Blame basketball, not me. I just call 'em as I see 'em. If they hit threes in their home games people will wonder what Holtmann did to change things up.I think you know better than this.
I think you know better than this.I lived through the Randy Ayers and Jim O'Brien era, so I know failures.
I lived through the Randy Ayers and Jim O'Brien era, so I know failures.Both of them had failures to be sure but unlike Chris Holtmann they both also had successful seasons.
I lived through the Randy Ayers and Jim O'Brien era, so I know failures.
These two added with Chris Holtmann are why I've questioned hearing that Ohio State is a top 25 basketball program, even after Thad Matta lifted the program. Throw in Gary Williams and that takes us back to 1986 (not quite back to Medina's modern college basketball start of 1985).See:
(https://i.imgur.com/9IbOS7E.png)
That's five coaches with only Thad Matta consistently winning tournament games going back almost 40 years. That sounds more like a Top 30 or 35 program. Take out Matta and the mostly leftover mediocrity is more like Top 40 or 50.
Across 15 seasons of Ayers and O'Brien, Ohio State had three tournament runs lasting behind the first weekend - '91, '92, '99. In turn they had 6 total losing seasons (%40). A lot for a program expected to routinely compete for B1G titles.
Holtmann is without those extremes, saddling the middle more with 20 win seasons and nothing to show for it come the tournament. (It's the consistency of those 20 win seasons that might be fooling that last of Holtmann's supporters.) In that sense Holtmann's tenure is playing out like an extended version of Gary Williams' shorter time at Ohio State:
[img width=274.381 height=65]https://i.imgur.com/VCMZ3lo.png[/img]
I think the "gambler's fallacy" would be to compare to the best periods in program history. I'm not doing that and I went to great lengths to avoid that. I'm comparing to the ~40 years since tournament expansion and if you went back much further Holtmann would look even worse by comparison because you'd start getting back into Fred Taylor's glory days.You wrote there's a 50/50 chance about the coach being as good or better. And there's no real rule on that. There's no magic rule that because things were one way that they'll fly back.
Are you watching tOSU/Northwestern? Ohio State has one if the worst teams in the B1G for the second consecutive season. That is inexcusable for a program with Ohio State's resources.
You wrote there's a 50/50 chance about the coach being as good or better. And there's no real rule on that. There's no magic rule that because things were one way that they'll fly back.I started the whole discussion with what I think the reasonable program expectations for Ohio State are.
You wrote there's a 50/50 chance about the coach being as good or better. And there's no real rule on that. There's no magic rule that because things were one way that they'll fly back.I'll quibble that I understand and agree with the "rule" although it's not a rule.
No matter how you slice it, Ohio State is one of the better Basketball programs in the league.
How I am slicing it is results since 1985 which is how we’re defining "modern" college Basketball starting with the “expansion to a 64 team tournament for the 1985 season.”For the record, I'm not sitting here pointing to the AP ranking saying "TOP 10". I actually agree that they aren't quite that. However, looking at what you've listed, basically the worst stat for tOSU is 24th in NCAA appearances and even that is top-25.
The results: 22 NCAA Tournament appearances; 9 league titles; 8 S16s; 5 E8s; 3 F4
Those results aren’t comparatively Top 10. If, however, rolling back the years all the way to 1949 improves Ohio State’s standing to 10th, that tells me Ohio State’s "modern" era is a step or two down from its 1949-1985 run.
When I question Ohio State’s Top 25 standing, I’m slicing it in terms of modern college basketball, 1985 and on.
For the record, Ohio State ranks 24th all time with 31 tourney bids (first bid 1939). They rank 19th with 14 S16s and 7th with 10 FFs, 7 of which are before 1970.
A Top 10 program pre-1985? Top 25 or 30 since?
Either way, fire Chris Holtmann.
Radio Chatter: they were talking on Friday what if Holtman had won a specific 3 games?I mean, yes and no . . .
What if his first year he beat Penn State? Then OSU would have had a share of the Big Ten Title, and a trophy in the case.
What if OSU beat Illinois in overtime for the Big Ten Tournament Championship? Another title and trophy in the case.
What if OSU beat Oral Roberts in the opening round of the NCAA tournament? Most likely they make it to the 2nd weekend, and a sweet 16 appearance.
If Holtman has those three accolades in his cabinet, he is given grace for these last two seasons. But since he doesn't, it looks like Bjork has his first termination to figure out here soon.
Hearing it put this way makes me wonder how close the line is between success and failure. 3 more wins over 6 years doesn't seem like that big of a deal, but in this case they end up being a huge deal.
(Medina would say that Holtmann is recruiting well but coaching poorly, I'd expect.)I'm sure you already know this but I really don't care. As HC he is responsible for both recruiting and coaching. The results are below the standard. If it is because they don't have enough talent that is his fault for not getting better talent. If it is because the gameday coaching sucks, that is his fault for not coaching better on gamedays.
I'm sure you already know this but I really don't care. As HC he is responsible for both recruiting and coaching. The results are below the standard. If it is because they don't have enough talent that is his fault for not getting better talent. If it is because the gameday coaching sucks, that is his fault for not coaching better on gamedays.Yeah, I know it's the results that matter, not the cause.
I *THINK* the talent is there. Based on recruiting rankings and stars and all of that, it appears that Ohio State *SHOULD* at least be one of the more talented teams in the league. Thus, I *THINK* that it is a gameday coaching problem and we've certainly seen that in a lot of end-of-game collapses (ie, against your Boilermakers last year when they let an almost sealed win slip away).
Further, my view is that coaching hires are basically a crap shoot so I think all the talk about "plan" is kinda silly because plenty of hires that looked dubious turned out great and plenty that looked great turned out bad.What is interesting is that I also kind of feel that way, which is why going on an on about Holtmann being a "failure" sort of gets lumped in the same boat. Coaches aren't magical, everything is a crap shoot to some degree. I don't think it makes logical sense to say hiring a coach is a crap shoot and also fire the coach because a handful of games didn't go your way, especially these days.
I'm curious what the board thinks about coaching decisions from the perspective of an AD so I want to do a separate post/poll on that but I want to make sure I have the two starting points right.I don't like the term "crapshoot". I think I'd prefer "educated guess" lol..
My view as articulated in this thread is that an AD should start by realistically assessing the program to get a realistic expectation. If the current coach is substantially above that, fight to keep him. If he is substantially below that, fire him. If he is near that, eh. I really don't care what the plan is because my view is that the "average coach" should attain the program average.
Further, my view is that coaching hires are basically a crap shoot so I think all the talk about "plan" is kinda silly because plenty of hires that looked dubious turned out great and plenty that looked great turned out bad.
I think that the above is also roughly @betarhoalphadelta (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=19) 's view but if I'm wrong, please correct me.
The following is my paraphrasing of @MaximumSam (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1572) 's view so if I'm misstating your view here, please correct me:
Max's view is that you need to have a transition plan in place first because you need to select a replacement that you think is better than your current coach.
What is interesting is that I also kind of feel that way, which is why going on an on about Holtmann being a "failure" sort of gets lumped in the same boat. Coaches aren't magical, everything is a crap shoot to some degree. I don't think it makes logical sense to say hiring a coach is a crap shoot and also fire the coach because a handful of games didn't go your way, especially these days.I think about it more like a marriage. You go into marriage thinking you're going to be happy. Everyone does. But if the divorce rate (and I know this is a BS stat) is 50%, it seems that maybe a lot of people aren't all that great at making the decision.
Here you go MBAt this point support for Holtmann is nearing zero.
https://www.elevenwarriors.com/forum/ohio-state-basketball/2024/01/145196/fed-up#new
The problem with this comparison is that one can be happier single than married to a crappy spouse. But OSU needs to have a basketball coach, and can't hire and fire people based on what it imagines a good program should be like. That's like guys who get married then constantly cheat in hopes of finding something better than what they have.
I think about it more like a marriage. You go into marriage thinking you're going to be happy. Everyone does. But if the divorce rate (and I know this is a BS stat) is 50%, it seems that maybe a lot of people aren't all that great at making the decision.
But if it's just not right, at some point you realize that. At that point you may not know whether the next person will be Mr/Mrs Right, but you know the one you're married to is Mr/Mrs Wrong, and you need to get out of it.
Thinking you need to hang on to the one you're with, hoping for some magical improvement, is just a recipe for disappointment.
At this point support for Holtmann is nearing zero.I'd say the issue is less support for him, of which there ain't much, and support for firing him and paying the buyout and hiring a new coach, which is something different entirely and not something I have any real insight about.
The problem with this comparison is that one can be happier single than married to a crappy spouse. But OSU needs to have a basketball coach, and can't hire and fire people based on what it imagines a good program should be like. That's like guys who get married then constantly cheat in hopes of finding something better than what they have.Yeah, there are limits to the analogy. To expand:
I'd say the issue is less support for him, of which there ain't much, and support for firing him and paying the buyout and hiring a new coach, which is something different entirely and not something I have any real insight about.
When I got divorced, it was--and continues to be--expensive. But as the old saw goes, that's because it's worth it. I'd rather "pay the buyout" than continue to be unhappy...I literally laughed outloud at this.
And that "buyout" is far more financially material to me than anything OSU is going to have to pay.
And that "buyout" is far more financially material to me than anything OSU is going to have to pay.(https://i.imgur.com/ykrPjNK.png)
I think about it more like a marriage. You go into marriage thinking you're going to be happy. Everyone does. But if the divorce rate (and I know this is a BS stat) is 50%, it seems that maybe a lot of people aren't all that great at making the decision.I think parts of this are right, though I think the last part is not.
But if it's just not right, at some point you realize that. At that point you may not know whether the next person will be Mr/Mrs Right, but you know the one you're married to is Mr/Mrs Wrong, and you need to get out of it.
Thinking you need to hang on to the one you're with, hoping for some magical improvement, is just a recipe for disappointment.
I think parts of this are right, though I think the last part is not.Again, all analogies are prone to being picked apart if you try hard enough.
I think this dynamic can be about vibe and energy. If fans simply stop caring, you can be modestly successful, and they still can you. There's also an internal thing. If an AD believes in the coach and process, you might wring out an extra chance. if that dynamic is fraught, or the AD just stops believing, it's extra over. And that blends with the practicalities of records and such.
But I do think the idea of "magical improvement" kind of short sells it. Coaches all the time have dramatic shifts in fortunes. Processes work, things come together, etc.
But it's hard to predict, and resets of vibes are refreshing (probably to a degree like divorce).
I don't get the sense that there's anything worth salvaging.This is fairly wild for a team where the vast bulk of minutes are going to freshmen and sophomores. Get old, stay old remains the college basketball mantra.
This is fairly wild for a team where the vast bulk of minutes are going to freshmen and sophomores. Get old, stay old remains the college basketball mantra.We seem to be talking past each other. You have said repeatedly (for years, not just this season) that they are young.
We seem to be talking past each other. You have said repeatedly (for years, not just this season) that they are young.Well, one, no I haven't said for years that they are young. They weren't young in 2018, they weren't young in 2020-22. This team and the the 2019 team are probably the youngest teams Holtmann has had. He does better with veteran teams. That's not controversial, because all coaches do better with veteran teams. So when someone says hey look they aren't great this year and ignore that, they aren't actually looking at the team.
@betarhoalphadelta (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=19) and I have pointed out repeatedly that a youthful roster isn't a legitimate excuse for a coach when:
- He is in his seventh year, and
- Last season was comically awful, and
- The coach has never had any significant success.
Do you have an answer for that, or are we just supposed to wait indefinitely while the coach in question is paid Millions per year to try to figure out how to construct a roster?
Well, one, no I haven't said for years that they are young. They weren't young in 2018, they weren't young in 2020-22. This team and the the 2019 team are probably the youngest teams Holtmann has had. He does better with veteran teams. That's not controversial, because all coaches do better with veteran teams. So when someone says hey look they aren't great this year and ignore that, they aren't actually looking at the team.Holtmann's defenders generally and you specifically always have an excuse:
Now, last season did suck, and I agree he has no won the conference or made runs in March. Those are pretty objective facts. The difference we are having is in the evaluation. Is there something worth saving there or not? Canning means we probably have a crappy year next season as opposed to a good one. We are giving up something real and tangible. I would want to feel real confident in the next coach to just give up on the program like that, and the idea that we just hire and fire until we get it right is not attractive to me. If you fire Holtmann and the program doesn't improve, you have done something stupid. No debate there.I just disagree completely.
I just disagree completely.It's not a matter of disagreement, it's a fact. If the program gets worse based on firing the coach and hiring a new coach, it was a bad decision.
If you fire an unsuccessful coach and end up with another unsuccessful coach, you try again until you figure it out or simply stumble into a successful coach.
It's not a matter of disagreement, it's a fact. If the program gets worse based on firing the coach and hiring a new coach, it was a bad decision.Not a fact and I disagree with this opinion.
Not a fact and I disagree with this opinion.Well, this brings up Matrix levels of discourse. "What is real?" No, getting worse as a program when you fire the coach means you made a bad decision and instead of owning it, you just make excuses. Of course firing Hope and hiring Hazell was a bad decision. That's the best things about sports - you can just check and know whether it was good or bad. My harping is that you assume the next coach will be better and we can just hire and fire until we get it right. That isn't guaranteed - you can hire and fire yourself into becoming Louisville too.
Even if the immediate result is not successful, it still gets you one step closer to a successful coach.
Besides, replacing one unsuccessful coach with another one is a net zero anyway so you aren't materially worse off even if the second coach is even worse than the first.
The example that @betarhoalphadelta (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=19) gave of the Hope->Hazell transition is on point. Holtmann is our Hope, an unsuccessful coach. Even if his replacement ends up being our Hazell (arguably worst in program history) it still wasn't a bad decision to fire the unsuccessful Hope/Holtmann because the first step toward a successful coach is to get rid of the unsuccessful coach.
Well, this brings up Matrix levels of discourse. "What is real?" No, getting worse as a program when you fire the coach means you made a bad decision and instead of owning it, you just make excuses. Of course firing Hope and hiring Hazell was a bad decision. That's the best things about sports - you can just check and know whether it was good or bad. My harping is that you assume the next coach will be better and we can just hire and fire until we get it right. That isn't guaranteed - you can hire and fire yourself into becoming Louisville too.If you fire Holtmann and things get worse then yes, a mistake was made but you are combining the fire and hire decisions and that is not, IMHO, appropriate.
If you fire Holtmann and things get worse then yes, a mistake was made but you are combining the fire and hire decisions and that is not, IMHO, appropriate.Oh come on. OSU can't go without a basketball coach. They will hire someone. This isn't a situation involving off court stuff - it is 100% based on money and basketball. The firing and hiring are two sides of the same coin and if you mess them up, you mess them up. There is no need at all to fire Holtmann, so yes, the ADs can absolutely mess it up, and if they do it was a bad decision.
When Purdue fired Hope they hired Hazell and things got worse so yes, a mistake was made. That mistake was hiring Hazell.
If tOSU fires Holtmann that decision stands on it's own. It is the right decision because his performance is below the program baseline.
If the next coach is worse then the mistake was the selection of the next coach.
There is no need at all to fire HoltmannOh but there is
Have either of you ever taken any training on decision-making?My whole job is mostly making decisions based on limited information, coupled with a lot of negotiation. I'm going to focus on the process - my clients are going to focus on the results. Which is really the heart of the debate here. Medina's whole thing is this has been going on for 7 years and the results haven't come. Which is fair!
First rule of decision-making is that determining "good" vs "bad" decision-making is based on the PROCESS followed, not the result.
My whole job is mostly making decisions based on limited information, coupled with a lot of negotiation. I'm going to focus on the process - my clients are going to focus on the results. Which is really the heart of the debate here. Medina's whole thing is this has been going on for 7 years and the results haven't come. Which is fair!
My focus has been on the process - recruiting, KenPom rankings, etc. They are doing a lot of the right things and results should hopefully follow.
IMHO Holtmann benefited from having recruits from Matta that promulgate the culture for a few years, but right now seems to be on a downward trajectory.His first year, definitely (recruits Matta didn't win with but still). His second year there were only two left, CJ Jackson and Andre Wesson. His best two years were in some order 2018, 2020, and 2021, so no, I don't think Matta recruits were holding up the program.
And IMHO you've stated this is "young team" b/c they start 4 sophomores and 1 senior.They are a young team because they have one guy in the rotation who is an upperclassman and on the team last year, plus two more seniors from the transfer portal, one who starts, and six freshmen or sophomores. Wisconsin was fairly middling last year, and this year they have upperclassmen who were on the team last year. Magically, they are good now.
Purdue in 2007 had their leading minutes played by Moore (true frosh), Kramer (true soph) & Hummel (true frosh), and went 25-9, 2nd in conference, and made the 2nd round of the tournament. In 2008 their minutes were led by Moore & Hummel (true soph), Johnson was 5th (true soph), and Lewis Jackson (true frosh) was 6th contributing >20 mpg. They tied for first in the conference and went to the S16.Well, right. Matt Painter is the best coach in the conference, and Robbie Hummel is one of the best players in Purdue history. Purdue is the best program in the B1G, at least right now. So yeah, that is what they are chasing. This would be like me comparing any random coach to Urban Meyer and OSU and wondering why they aren't as good as that.
Honestly, I can't think of a single reason where you would fire Holtmann midseason, when they've been a pretty decent team. The idea makes no sense. You do that when things have gone hopelessly southUm . . .
Another name: Lamont Paris at South Carolina. Got Chattanooga turned around from awful to good. Quickly got South Carolina sorted out. Coached under Bo Ryan and Greg Gard. Only one tourney appearance so no March history to talk about. Didn't realize he's from Ohio, so might listen to offers.I brought him up 2 weeks ago and almost nobody responded.
I brought him up 2 weeks ago and almost nobody responded.I've brought up a dozen people and nobody responds to that either
I didn't like any of those to be honest.Hence the problem
That would not be a good hire.He lost to Penn State last year, so at least we keep things consistent
If I had to guess I'd say Buzz Williams will be the next OSU coach. He is in his fifth year at TAMU, so he knows Bjork, and he has one NCAA appearance and probably won't make it this year, so TAMU won't care. Hooray?I think this illustrates why we have been in such different places regarding this situation for so long because I agree with this:
That would not be a good hire.
Reported attendance for Ohio State's home game against #14 Illinois: 10,285.Lol, well about that...
Reported attendance for the most recent Ohio State Women's home game: 18,660.
There are fans in Columbus who will support a good BB team but the AD is giving them the finger by continuing to employ the current coach.
Reported attendance for Ohio State's home game against #14 Illinois: 10,285.Was that the Iowa game? Caitlin Clark is a draw. She's the most well known player in college basketball. Men or women
Reported attendance for the most recent Ohio State Women's home game: 18,660.
There are fans in Columbus who will support a good BB team but the AD is giving them the finger by continuing to employ the current coach.
Max says that BB has changed and things are more random. I direct your attention to this week's top-25. The four biggest blue bloods are Carolina (#3), Dook (#7), Kansas (#8), and Kentucky (#10). Other top-10 teams include UCONN which has been achieving at a blue-blood level for a few dacades (just not quite as long as the top-4), Purdue which is #1 all-time in B1G Championships, and Wisconsin which has been a high achiever since Pat Richter hired Bo Ryan.The rise of Wisconsin was really started when Richter hired Stu Jackson. Stan Van Gundy was a disaster in his one season. Then came Dick Bennett.
The rise of Wisconsin was really started when Richter hired Stu Jackson. Stan Van Gundy was a disaster in his one season. Then came Dick Bennett.I stand corrected. The difference is not material to my underlying point which was that UW has been a high-achieving program for a long time and they have a top-10 team currently.
Waiting to see how the season plays out? What more needs to be seen?Exactly!
You start now before anyone else starts.Exactly!
Lamont Paris just took down Tennessee. His agent's phone will be ringing.
Jobs will likely be opening up in the Big Ten alone.
Michigan, Indiana, Washington, UCLA and USC are not performing to expectations either.
Upthread Max mentioned that the coach at Ole Miss is a Bjork hire.No no - the Old Miss coach is Chris Beard, famous for getting fired from Texas last year for getting arrested for domestic violence. He's a strong basketball coach but there are some roadblocks there. Bjork hired Kermit Davis when he was at Ole Miss. He got canned after five sad seasons and Beard replaced him.
No no - the Old Miss coach is Chris Beard, famous for getting fired from Texas last year for getting arrested for domestic violence. He's a strong basketball coach but there are some roadblocks there. Bjork hired Kermit Davis when he was at Ole Miss. He got canned after five sad seasons and Beard replaced him.Oh right.
Lamont Paris is an attractive name, though he is in the second year of a five year contract. Not sure what his buyout is, but there probably is one. I'm thinking OSU is going for the bargain bin on a new hire - not sure they would consider him. Hard to say, it's not like they announce those things, but OSU Ad hiring a guy he knows with no buyout is probably more attractive than someone he doesn't know with a buyout.
Oh right.There is that, and I'm not ruling it out. But they would owe Holtmann around 15 million, plus paying the buyout if there is one, plus the new contract. The going rate seems to be around 4 million a year. So not cheap.
Yeah, probably a hard no on Beard.
I don't think Ohio State will be as scared of a buyout as you suggest, the tOSU Athletic Department has enough money that they can afford it if they think the situation warrants. Also, if we know anything about Bjork it is that he isn't afraid of spending his employers' money. I'm more scared of him spending too much than I am of him spending too little.
The right coach at $6M/yr is a bargain and the wrong coach at $2M/yr is a waste of money. Of course the wrong coach at $6M/yr is worse than either of those.
Greg Gard makes $3.5 Mil.Get ready to pay more. The biggest bargain is Matt Painter at 3.58 million.
Get ready to pay more. The biggest bargain is Matt Painter at 3.58 million.He just signed it...
Kevin Willard signed on at Maryland for 3.9 million. Ed Cooley signed for nearly 6 million, supposedly. Hard to imagine a coach leaving one power five team for another without landing somewhere in that range.
He just signed it...He's due to make 3.95 million in two years, so he's in the range.
Honestly, I can't think of a single reason where you would fire Holtmann midseason, when they've been a pretty decent team. The idea makes no sense. You do that when things have gone hopelessly south or there is some sort of scandal, or there is some benefit in hiring someone new. OSU doesn't really even have a athletic director yet, so none of those things exist here.The definition of hopelessly south:
Nebraska, Wisconsin, and Northwestern currently experiencing benefits of not firing guys on the hot seat.Hoiberg is in his fifth season at a school with an atrocious basketball history. They have literally NEVER won an NCAA Tournament game. His first four seasons were not good but he did show improvement each year and the program average at Nebraska is so bad that even those years weren't definitively worse.
No no - the Old Miss coach is Chris Beard, famous for getting fired from Texas last year for getting arrested for domestic violence. He's a strong basketball coach but there are some roadblocks there. Bjork hired Kermit Davis when he was at Ole Miss. He got canned after five sad seasons and Beard replaced him.Kermit got that job after upsetting Big Ten teams in the tournament in his last two years at MTSU, so maybe you have something there
This attempted comparison was one of your weaker efforts, please try again.LOL, if your defense is Hoiberg is in his fifth season, Gard is in his 9th season, and Collins is in his 11th season, and this is supposed to mean something to anyone, I think I win that round.
Kermit got that job after upsetting Big Ten teams in the tournament in his last two years at MTSU, so maybe you have something thereWould make for good Muppets memes
LOL, if your defense is Hoiberg is in his fifth season, Gard is in his 9th season, and Collins is in his 11th season, and this is supposed to mean something to anyone, I think I win that round.I pointed out that those guys have things called accomplishments, since Holtmann doesn't the comparison favors moving on.
Penn State just won in Bloomington.Start all upperclassmen except for sophomore Kanye Clary.
They have a first year coach and they have a better team than Holtmann's seventh attempt.
Start all upperclassmen except for sophomore Kanye Clary.I don't necessarily agree that experience is the problem but it makes no difference in terms of evaluating this coach because:
I don't necessarily agree that experience is the problem but it makes no difference in terms of evaluating this coach because:It makes a difference for next year, because we could have a pretty solid team coming back, or we could have no one come back and get excited if we are 11-11 in February.
Our coach has had SEVEN FREAKING YEARS to figure out how to accumulate enough experience to put a competitive team on the floor and the only team he ever had that even got close to a league tire was the one where he didn't have much to do with constructing the roster.
It makes a difference for next year, because we could have a pretty solid team coming back, or we could have no one come back and get excited if we are 11-11 in February.Actual picture of everyone who agrees with this assessment.
Actual picture of everyone who agrees with this assessment.Also a picture of OSU's basketball history
Also a picture of OSU's basketball historyBulls#!t and you know better, don't make stupid comments.
Bulls#!t and you know better, don't make stupid comments.And a bunch of empty seats. Sorry, but facts are facts. If people don't support the program or go to the games, you can pretend that is all the coach's fault, or you can embrace reality and finally realize this ain't a basketball town and people don't care about it. That's not a proud history. Pick a pony.
I reviewed tOSU BB history early in this thread:
- Top-10 all time per AP
- 10 F4's, tied with MSU for 6th nationally behind only the bluest of blue bloods UNC, UCLA, DOOK, UK, and KU
- 14 S16's
- 20 Big Ten Championships, trails only PU and IU
This one feels like it should be done, sorry Sam. It could work, but it’s sports, it probably won’t.I'm not even against it. I wanted to see defensive improvement, and it hasn't been there. But I also see a young team and I'm seeing us go threw the knocks of a young team and then blowing it up before we get the rewards. Then we turn 2 years of crappiness into 7. The idea that we have nothing to lose is silly if you pay any attention to the sport at all.
He’s closing in on the thing that gets you fired. Is what it is.
https://www.reddit.com/r/HoosiersBasketball/comments/1ah37yx/holtmann_may_get_fired_tonight/
I highly doubt the credibility of this but who knows, maybe Gene Smith will suddenly remember that he has a job he is supposed to be doing for a few more months.
As bad as Holtmann is, most of those Hoosier posters are still lamenting that they hired Archie Miller instead of Chris Holtmann. :oI remember when all the Buckeye fans were mad we didn't get Archie
Hard to say. Archie has re-emerged at Rhode Island. His team sucks, but he has a player names Always Wright. Always has a brother named All Wright. We should pursue both of these guys.
What would have happened in a parallel universe where Indiana got the Butler HC, and OSU got the one from Dayton?
Pretty much the same thing? Or something else entirely?
When you are in a hole, the first step is to stop digging.Turn those standings upside down and they almost looks like semi-realistic football standings (with some surprises, but still).
Our shovel is named Chris Holtmann.
Turn those standings upside down and they almost looks like semi-realistic football standings (with some surprises, but still).Fire Fickell!
Waiting to see how the season plays out? What more needs to be seen?Speaking of Lamont Paris, one of his stars is a guy named Meechie Johnson. If that name sounds familiar to you it is because he was an Ohio State recruit who basically sucked and got no PT under Chris Holtmann. Now that he has a quality coach he is doing very well. He is a Junior so he cold come to Columbus with his coach next year and he could potentially be a good recruiter of the current team since he knows them from his time in Columbus.
You start now before anyone else starts.
Lamont Paris just took down Tennessee. His agent's phone will be ringing.
Jobs will likely be opening up in the Big Ten alone.
Michigan, Indiana, Washington, UCLA and USC are not performing to expectations either.
Speaking of Lamont Paris, one of his stars is a guy named Meechie Johnson. If that name sounds familiar to you it is because he was an Ohio State recruit who basically sucked and got no PT under Chris Holtmann. Now that he has a quality coach he is doing very well. He is a Junior so he cold come to Columbus with his coach next year and he could potentially be a good recruiter of the current team since he knows them from his time in Columbus.I have to admit, this makes me chuckle a bit for a few reasons.
Coaching matters.
@MaximumSam (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1572) are you surprised?This must be that history you talk about
This must be that history you talk aboutHere is some recent history for you, our BB team has lost five straight and eight out of nine.
Honestly, I can't think of a single reason where you would fire Holtmann midseason, when they've been a pretty decent team. The idea makes no sense. You do that when things have gone hopelessly south or there is some sort of scandal, or there is some benefit in hiring someone new. OSU doesn't really even have a athletic director yet, so none of those things exist here.Max' delusional view of Ohio State's BB team amuses me throughout this thread but this post is an all-time gem.
https://www.insidethehall.com/2024/02/07/ius-biggest-comeback-in-over-25-years-yields-a-road-win-against-ohio-state/Lol what generation would that be?
The juxtaposition here between this being an historic comeback for IU and the loss being just another game for Ohio State is striking.
It appears that some delusional tOSU fans cough-Max-cough still haven't accepted reality but this team, just like last year's tOSU team isn't just bad, these two are generationally awful.
Lol what generation would that be?Dunno.... Go look at the OSU history (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ohio_State_Buckeyes_men's_basketball_seasons)... Ask yourself how many times Ohio State has finished in the bottom two spots of the conference in consecutive years (as it appears will happen):
Dunno.... Go look at the OSU history (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ohio_State_Buckeyes_men's_basketball_seasons)... Ask yourself how many times Ohio State has finished in the bottom two spots of the conference in consecutive years (as it appears will happen):Hard to say it is worse than Jim O'Brien's last two years, which were both bad and landed OSU on probation and with a postseason ban.
- 1929-30 and 1930-31 -- Harold Olsen -- 9th in conference both years. Coach survived (different times) but he also had a Big Ten Title to his name before that which Holtmann does not.
- 1975-76 and 1976-77 -- Fred Taylor followed by Eldon Miller -- 10th in conference both years. Taylor retired and Miller improved from 10th his first year to 6th, and then railed off 7 straight seasons in the top half of the conference, if never actually winning a league title.
- 1994-95, 1995-96, and 1996-97 -- Randy Ayers -- 10th, 10th, 9th in three consecutive years. Fired. (Technically that final year was 3rd to last in the conference, as PSU was already a member.)
Those are the only times it's happened. 45 year gap between the first and second, 20ish year gap between the second and third, and 30ish year gap between that incident and the current performance, if it holds up that they finished 13th last year and are currently 13th this year.
I'd call that "generationally bad" performance at Ohio State, wouldn't you?
Hard to say it is worse than Jim O'Brien's last two years, which were both bad and landed OSU on probation and with a postseason ban.Well in a smaller conference O'Brien didn't finish in either of the last two spots except for his first year (which was coming off the mess inherited from Ayers).
Well in a smaller conference O'Brien didn't finish in either of the last two spots except for his first year (which was coming off the mess inherited from Ayers).But to be as bad, he'd have to commit some egregious NCAA violations on the way out. It's a special sort of terrible two years where you also doink your successor in his first year. His last team finished 148th on KenPom. This team would probably have to lose out by double digits in every game to get to that mark.
With only 16 league games per season O'Brien at least got 15 wins across those two seasons. Even with a larger 20-game league season, Holtmann would have to go 7-1 the rest of the way this year to equal that performance.
But to be as bad, he'd have to commit some egregious NCAA violations on the way out. It's a special sort of terrible two years where you also doink your successor in his first year. His last team finished 148th on KenPom. This team would probably have to lose out by double digits in every game to get to that mark.You're right... They'll probably only lose 5 or 6 of those by double digits :57:
Hard to say it is worse than Jim O'Brien's last two years, which were both bad and landed OSU on probation and with a postseason ban.Obie was still good for one colossal upset every year, against MSU or whoever.
Lol what generation would that be?Well, @betarhoalphadelta (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=19) covered this pretty well, this team clearly is generationally bad.
Hard to say it is worse than Jim O'Brien's last two years, which were both bad and landed OSU on probation and with a postseason ban.
But to be as bad, he'd have to commit some egregious NCAA violations on the way out.Here you are conflating two separate issues.
Vis-a-vis your "get old, stay old", Ohio State would be old if they still had these guys but they'd still suck because Chris Holtmann would still be their coach:Ledee is in his sixth year. Definitely shows the power of developing - he was basically a nonfactor for four years, a bench rotation player last year, and now one of the best players in the sport.
https://www.elevenwarriors.com/ohio-state-basketball/2024/02/145436/meechie-johnson-jaedon-ledee-among-former-ohio-state-hoopers-having-career-years-elsewhere?amp
Ledee is in his sixth year. Definitely shows the power ofFIFYdevelopingeffective coaching- he was basically a nonfactor for four years, a bench rotation player last year, and now one of the best players in the sport.
FIFYEhh, I always thought it was pretty amazing that Holtmann turned a 6'6 power forward into an NBA player with E.J. Liddell. It's not like guys haven't developed. But they haven't developed into great defensive players, which is the main issue.
Vis-a-vis your "get old, stay old", Ohio State would be old if they still had these guys but they'd still suck because Chris Holtmann would still be their coach:Those kids both seem like the sorts who had some maturing to do in their games.
https://www.elevenwarriors.com/ohio-state-basketball/2024/02/145436/meechie-johnson-jaedon-ledee-among-former-ohio-state-hoopers-having-career-years-elsewhere?amp
Wasn't Holtmann starting to skip postgame pressers? Try firing him for cause, let that attempt ultimately fail, but point made. You know the phrase "don't let the door hit you on the way out?" In this case make it nasty - absolutely let the door hit Holtmann on the way out.LOL that seems harsh
Urban was notorious for being hella late to his midweek media obligations, and Paul Keels would be stuck there flapping his gums without him for the first 15 minutes.I'm not aware of him skipping anything. OSU (great historical basketball program) didn't have many media at road games at times he would just speak to them in the hallway.
Sounds like the Holtmann was just skipping them altogether.
Wasn't Holtmann starting to skip postgame pressers? Try firing him for cause, let that attempt ultimately fail, but point made. You know the phrase "don't let the door hit you on the way out?" In this case make it nasty - absolutely let the door hit Holtmann on the way out.
LOL that seems harshI completely agree with @MaximumSam (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1572) here. I've wanted to get rid of Holtmann for insufficient on-court performance for literally years but by all accounts he is a good guy, hasn't had off-court scandals, etc. This isn't a case of hating Holtmann. It is simply a case of his teams not winning enough games so he had to go.
LOL that seems harshAccording to eleven warriors he was blindsided by the firing :043:.The guy must be mushroom - kept in the dark and fed shit.12 million $$$ buyout for that stellar supervision
According to eleven warriors he was blindsided by the firing :043:.The guy must be mushroom - kept in the dark and fed shit.12 million $$$ buyout for that stellar supervisionI'm not disagreeing with you because you are right, 11Warriors has an article with that headline and to that effect.
I'm not disagreeing with you because you are right, 11Warriors has an article with that headline and to that effect.I’ve been telling you for years never to believe anything on 11 Warriors 😇
That said, I flat don't believe it.
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/game/_/gameId/401597185/south-carolina-auburnNot all that high.
What are the chances that Paris was distracted by other items.
How do you rank the potential coaching candidates from least to most likely?I'd be totally guessing, what do you think?
I think this'll be like the last search. No big time candidates with any connections to Ohio State, so it'll probably be some random coach that has had some success, kind of like we got with Holtmann. I would've said we might take another stab at McDermott, who almost took the job last time, but he's 59 now. I doubt we want to go for someone that old.I frankly think that the mistake they made last time was that they put too much emphasis on performance in the immediately prior Tournament. You subtly referenced it, but Holtmann's last Butler team made the S16 as a #4 seed on a path of 13-12 because #5 seed Minnesota got upset by #12 MTSU that year.
So watch the tourney this year, and see who makes the S16. One of those might be the new coach next year, just like Holtmann was after his run of beating 2 double-digit seeds right before his hire.
because #5 seed Minnesota got upset by #12 MTSU that year.Don't sleep on MTSU
How do you rank the potential coaching candidates from least to most likely?https://www.on3.com/college/ohio-state-buckeyes/news/chris-holtmann-replacement-odds-released-next-ohio-state-basketball-coach-wes-sean-miller-dusty-may-lamont-paris/
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-basketball/news/chris-holtmann-ohio-state-firing-one-and-done-players/7e43bdd82373fcef3f6d6133Yeah, unexpected NBA one and dones don't really help. Certainly, if they had played two years instead of one, Holtmann would probably still be kicking. But I felt the overall problem was the lack of defense. Holtmann did a great job getting guys into good spots to show their scoring ability, but they hadn't been in the top 30 of defenses since 2020. Neither of those guys helped the cause there.
You may like this @MaximumSam (https://www.cfb51.com/index.php?action=profile;u=1572) .
The article mostly talks about Branham and Sensabaugh.
By Gene Smith's words, the standard at Ohio State is to "be in the hunt, win the Championship periodically, and go deep in the postseason."
By that standard Branham and Sensabaugh never contributed anything of note to the program. I don't mean that as a criticism if those kids, they came to Ohio State and played very well. From the perspective of the program, they didn't get us where we need to be because they weren't good enough to overcome the rest of the team's mediocrity but at the same time too good to stick around for the rest of the team to grow around them.
How do you rank the potential coaching candidates from least to most likely?I'm pleased that Buzz Williams isn't dominating the conversation. Based on all I've read and heard, I'd say the odds lean:
I think this'll be like the last search. No big time candidates with any connections to Ohio State, so it'll probably be some random coach that has had some success, kind of like we got with Holtmann. I would've said we might take another stab at McDermott, who almost took the job last time, but he's 59 now. I doubt we want to go for someone that old.One thing that caught Smith's eye on Holtmann was Kyle Young committing to him and Butler over us and Thad. Kind of showed where we were.
So watch the tourney this year, and see who makes the S16. One of those might be the new coach next year, just like Holtmann was after his run of beating 2 double-digit seeds right before his hire.
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-basketball/news/chris-holtmann-ohio-state-firing-one-and-done-players/7e43bdd82373fcef3f6d6133
The article mostly talks about Branham and Sensabaugh.
https://www.elevenwarriors.com/ohio-state-basketball/2024/02/145660/a-billion-wicked-thoughtsGood stuff. I was particularly struck by the bolded line below...
The similarity lies in the optics of two programs with strong cultures that have suffered through pervasive, repetitive, uncomplicated and self-inflicted setbacks. Day and Holtmann both come across as leaders who would rather be proven right than change course to do what's right. That observation expired abruptly for the football program after the Cotton Bowl.
<snip>
As for the basketball program, there was nothing stinky about it except for the Januarys, Februarys, Marches, road games, 2nd halves - the pervasive, repetitive, uncomplicated and self-inflicted setbacks that showed no sign of being corrected. If Holtmann coached at Ohio State ten more years everyone reading this would have been able to retire early by shorting the program after the New Year.
<snip>
He did it with an odd elegance and grace that normally doesn't accompany a program that shows its ass every January and February in the 2nd halves of every basketball game it plays. And he showed no willingness or appetite to change, so Ohio State made that change on his behalf.
Been a lot of Chris Jent chatter, which....Jent is interesting.
Good stuff. I was particularly struck by the bolded line below...It is interesting because change can be difficult for any of us. All of these guys have had success, if they hadn't they wouldn't be in these positions.
Of course he goes on (in the snipped portions) to talk about how Day changed course and is doing (from outside observation at least) everything that suggests he recognizes his mistakes and he's addressing them.
This to me is what makes the situation similar to Painter when he hit his 2-year slump. Obviously we've already talked about the history of success he had with the Baby Boilers, but literally he had flirted with the Missouri job to get additional resources for the BB program (and a nice raise for himself obv), and then just after doing that, the program hit a tailspin.
I think the difference is that Painter, like Day, recognized that HE was making mistakes. Painter owned up to it with the AD, explained how HE was going to change and how it would help, and the AD took his word for it and gave him enough rope to either hang himself or swing to safety.
I can't know what went on behind closed doors between Holtmann and Smith, but apparently Smith didn't think the situation was going to right itself under Holtmann.
Jent is interesting.Feels like the kind of hire you make when everyone qualified says no.
According to the Dispatch (Columbus paper for those unaware), he is interested.
He has connections to multiple successful coaches at Ohio State:
- He was recruited by and began his collegiate career unde Gary Williams.
- He played during what I've called "Peak Ayers" when Randy Ayers' Buckeyes won back-to-back league titles, made back-to-back S16's, made an E8, and would have made a F4 if not for Michigan's industrial scale cheating.
- He was an assistant coach on Matta's second (and the program's most recent F4 as well as Matta's and the program's most recent E8 and S16.
- He returned to Matta's staff for what turned out to be Matta's final season - this was a disaster season.
Maybe they misspelled Chris Jans?Jans isn't friends with Lebron James. Totally unqualified.
Jans isn't friends with Lebron James. Totally unqualified.Probably best to keep Bronny away anyway. Averaging 5.7 ppg on 27% 3 point shooting on a 10-16 USC team
Maybe they misspelled Chris Jans?I wonder if he’ll ever end up somewhere where that messy BG stuff actually matters.
I wonder if he’ll ever end up somewhere where that messy BG stuff actually matters.I totally forgot about that until you brought it up. Totally not like OSU to hire a former BGSU coach with an affinity for co-eds
Since then, he’s been at the types of schools where it just doesn’t.
Getting whipped by Minnesota won't help the Diebler causeDefinitely doesn't. I think that Diebler's only real chance is to AT LEAST make the Tournament and with that loss the odds of that are getting ridiculously long.