And we’d probably be 14-9 right now. Just sayin’.
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
25-26 MBB Futurescaping
- Thread starter Da Lama
- Start date
You drive a hard bargain…
Meanwhile I'm running the ol Grinnell College offense, BD is scoring 100 and we're losing by 50
LINE CHANGE!
MaybeaBuff
Well-Known Member
We do line change offense now, with 11 guys, with out the pace.
I have lots of thoughts on this. And I'm not really sure how to verbalize them, so get ready for a stream of verbal diarrhea.
First, let's address my biases. Tad is the greatest CU men's basketball coach of my lifetime. Period. This is not up for debate. This is also not the highest bar to clear. Tom Apke, Tom Miller, Joe Harrington, Ricardo Patton and Jeff Bzdelik isn't exactly murderers row. But the simple fact is that those five coaches combined to have a winning percentage of 45%. Tad is at 62%.
Second, I hate RG with a passion. His dismantling of C-Unit was malpractice. This is a football school - no one will ever doubt that sincerely. Football pays the bills. A majority of the budget needs to go to football. But taking away what is the equivalent of a rounding error from hoops was dumb. Disrespecting the future big time donors that make up C-Unit was a fire worthy offense IMO. He's done two things properly in his entire time - his fundraising for Balch (which basically consisted of him saying "hey, I'm not Mike Bohn" and people paying up) and hiring Prime (which was done by all reports by our President telling him how to do his damn job).
Biases out of the way, let's discuss the CU hoops program. Judging by the results of my poll, an overwhelming volume of the fan base expects the team to at least be a bubble team most years, if not a tourney team most years. This is fair. But it also needs to have some more color added to it. There is a legitimate argument that CU is the program in the Big 12 that is least set up for success. We don't have history to draw upon. We don't have an NIL budget - I know some people have said that Tad had $2M to spend this offseason. I can't confirm or disprove this. I've heard some people say that Tad had $2M to spend and didn't. I've heard some people say that Tad was told they COULD spend up to $2M but he would have to justify it and was rebuffed. I honestly don't know. But I do know that Kansas State gave $2M to one player alone this offseason, so even if we had it it would definitely help but it's not exactly a warchest to build a S16 team. I also cannot stress enough that we are probably in the worst recruiting area in the conference. Colorado sucks for prep basketball. The problem is that this fanbase also has memories of JScott and DWhite - two damn unicorns. Colorado HS hoops might give you one power conference player a year. Maybe. So you have to recruit elsewhere. California was our hotbed when we were in the P12 where we could swoop in on players that were under the radar or that were "backup" plans for major programs. That's how Tad built his first team with Spencer and Ski both wanting to prove the teams that didn't want them wrong. We then could dabble in Texas as well. But there's no recruiting hotbed close. No Vegas, Chicago, Houston, Cincinnati, etc. within close distance. It's just harder here.
So what the **** happened this year? Quite simply, we didn't put a team together that can compete at the B12 level. In an athletic conference with ball hawking guards and gigantic big men, we have neither. So what happened? I honestly think KJ leaving caught everyone off guard. They knew he would be good last year, but wasn't expecting THAT. And he had no choice but to go. Hammond and Ruffin are ok as rotation guys, but not starters. I do know for a fact that after KJ left they went hard after Trent Perry and that they felt good about their chances. Obviously, we didn't get him and judging by reports I heard from a few non-CU people we weren't close. So did the coaching staff completely misread the situation? Did they drop the ball? I honestly don't know. But if we have one PG that can make a difference, this whole team is DRAMATICALLY different. Add Perry in and suddenly Jak and Baskin make a lot more sense on this team as they're glue guys who can do dirty things and score when set up properly. Malone is still probably a bust, but that was a flier that was probably worth taking (and worth doing whatever we can do get out of after this year).
I've also seen a lot of complaints about Lampkin, Hadley and O'Brien leaving. There is a LOT of revisionist history there. First off, Lampkin was hated by a majority of this board last year with tons of complaints to replace him. Not only that, but when he was brought in everyone - and I mean EVERYONE - involved knew it was a mercenary situation where we could help him rebuilt his reputation and we could get a solid big man for a year and then both would go on their separate ways. On top of that, is anyone seriously telling me that if we had a center who is putting up 8 & 7 a night on a mediocre to ****ty Syracuse team we'd be that much better off? Lampkin's best argument is "I'm not Malone". That's not enough. As for O'Brien, it was obvious he was going to go if for no other reason that he could get 2 years of free school elsewhere and only 1 more at CU. Sucks, but life. But he's a Jak type player - one I loved - but not exactly moving the needle. Hadley hurts, no one denies that. But he was always going to go for the biggest paycheck (and there were reportedly family issues as well that made him want to get back to the midwest which is one of the reasons that it appeared he was going to Iowa St for the longest time).
So let's discuss Tad. For years, I have ranted to anyone who is patient enough to listen to me that the man has many faults but the problem is that a majority of the fanbase focuses on wrong ones. Complaints about scoreless streaks are the stupidest thing I've ever seen in my life as every team goes through those. Numerous people have looked up numbers and shown that we have no more than a majority of teams. Is it frustrating? **** and yes. Is it subpar coaching? No. It's coaching 18-22 year olds. And the problem is that the loud noise over **** like that drowns out the actual complaints that could be had. His substitution patterns drive me insane (and many others). Personally, I hate zone defense, but it's obvious that we don't switch up to it enough. Recruiting is very hit or miss, and there are legit questions on NIL that need to be answered. But the man has built a culture here and won more than anyone else in school history. And he's done it with duct tape and bailing wire. He's CU's MacGyver. But is that enough in this current climate?
So say we replace Tad, who would we go for? Before anyone even suggests it, no Kim English is not leaving Providence which is a much better job that pays more than CU will to come here. We're looking at guys who are doing well at mid major spots. We're not going to land the top guys - they're going to be poached by the major programs. I don't know enough about the ****ty Texas schools, but I'm thinking something along the lines of Chris Gerlufsen at San Francisco. So how does that move the needle? A "program builder" who isn't flashy is exactly what we have now. So how do we get something above that? We're going to have to pay through the nose to get someone who's willing to come to a recruiting dead zone, to a team with no history, in one of the hardest conferences in the country, which gets no attention from the surrounding area who plays in a stadium that is comparable to a lot of HS stadiums in Texas. So is RG going to tell Prime - "hey, I know I need you to carry our entire athletic department right now, but I need to take $10 mil from your budget to try to get the basketball team turned around so we can make the tournament 50-75% of the time"? **** no. RG knows that the hoops program is staying out of the police blotter, they're self sustaining and he doesn't have to pay attention and they're not embarrassing on a national level (because as embarrassed as we are this year, no one nationally has noticed, I can promise you that).
So tell me - who do we go get? Give me realistic names. Give me a realistic plan. Tell me where the money is coming from.
There is a LEGIT conversation to be had about if Tad should be moving on. Personally, I sat through enough false prophets and absolute **** teams that I'm willing to ride the wave with Tad for a bit longer. If we're going to actually start to give a **** about the hoops program, that conversation can get more serious. But if not, all we're doing is replacing a 2010 Honda Civic with a Range Rover that might be damn good but is more likely to break down on the side of the road. We're not talking football here where we need to swing for the fences. Safe and reliable is the way to go for hoops barring dramatic changes.
First, let's address my biases. Tad is the greatest CU men's basketball coach of my lifetime. Period. This is not up for debate. This is also not the highest bar to clear. Tom Apke, Tom Miller, Joe Harrington, Ricardo Patton and Jeff Bzdelik isn't exactly murderers row. But the simple fact is that those five coaches combined to have a winning percentage of 45%. Tad is at 62%.
Second, I hate RG with a passion. His dismantling of C-Unit was malpractice. This is a football school - no one will ever doubt that sincerely. Football pays the bills. A majority of the budget needs to go to football. But taking away what is the equivalent of a rounding error from hoops was dumb. Disrespecting the future big time donors that make up C-Unit was a fire worthy offense IMO. He's done two things properly in his entire time - his fundraising for Balch (which basically consisted of him saying "hey, I'm not Mike Bohn" and people paying up) and hiring Prime (which was done by all reports by our President telling him how to do his damn job).
Biases out of the way, let's discuss the CU hoops program. Judging by the results of my poll, an overwhelming volume of the fan base expects the team to at least be a bubble team most years, if not a tourney team most years. This is fair. But it also needs to have some more color added to it. There is a legitimate argument that CU is the program in the Big 12 that is least set up for success. We don't have history to draw upon. We don't have an NIL budget - I know some people have said that Tad had $2M to spend this offseason. I can't confirm or disprove this. I've heard some people say that Tad had $2M to spend and didn't. I've heard some people say that Tad was told they COULD spend up to $2M but he would have to justify it and was rebuffed. I honestly don't know. But I do know that Kansas State gave $2M to one player alone this offseason, so even if we had it it would definitely help but it's not exactly a warchest to build a S16 team. I also cannot stress enough that we are probably in the worst recruiting area in the conference. Colorado sucks for prep basketball. The problem is that this fanbase also has memories of JScott and DWhite - two damn unicorns. Colorado HS hoops might give you one power conference player a year. Maybe. So you have to recruit elsewhere. California was our hotbed when we were in the P12 where we could swoop in on players that were under the radar or that were "backup" plans for major programs. That's how Tad built his first team with Spencer and Ski both wanting to prove the teams that didn't want them wrong. We then could dabble in Texas as well. But there's no recruiting hotbed close. No Vegas, Chicago, Houston, Cincinnati, etc. within close distance. It's just harder here.
So what the **** happened this year? Quite simply, we didn't put a team together that can compete at the B12 level. In an athletic conference with ball hawking guards and gigantic big men, we have neither. So what happened? I honestly think KJ leaving caught everyone off guard. They knew he would be good last year, but wasn't expecting THAT. And he had no choice but to go. Hammond and Ruffin are ok as rotation guys, but not starters. I do know for a fact that after KJ left they went hard after Trent Perry and that they felt good about their chances. Obviously, we didn't get him and judging by reports I heard from a few non-CU people we weren't close. So did the coaching staff completely misread the situation? Did they drop the ball? I honestly don't know. But if we have one PG that can make a difference, this whole team is DRAMATICALLY different. Add Perry in and suddenly Jak and Baskin make a lot more sense on this team as they're glue guys who can do dirty things and score when set up properly. Malone is still probably a bust, but that was a flier that was probably worth taking (and worth doing whatever we can do get out of after this year).
I've also seen a lot of complaints about Lampkin, Hadley and O'Brien leaving. There is a LOT of revisionist history there. First off, Lampkin was hated by a majority of this board last year with tons of complaints to replace him. Not only that, but when he was brought in everyone - and I mean EVERYONE - involved knew it was a mercenary situation where we could help him rebuilt his reputation and we could get a solid big man for a year and then both would go on their separate ways. On top of that, is anyone seriously telling me that if we had a center who is putting up 8 & 7 a night on a mediocre to ****ty Syracuse team we'd be that much better off? Lampkin's best argument is "I'm not Malone". That's not enough. As for O'Brien, it was obvious he was going to go if for no other reason that he could get 2 years of free school elsewhere and only 1 more at CU. Sucks, but life. But he's a Jak type player - one I loved - but not exactly moving the needle. Hadley hurts, no one denies that. But he was always going to go for the biggest paycheck (and there were reportedly family issues as well that made him want to get back to the midwest which is one of the reasons that it appeared he was going to Iowa St for the longest time).
So let's discuss Tad. For years, I have ranted to anyone who is patient enough to listen to me that the man has many faults but the problem is that a majority of the fanbase focuses on wrong ones. Complaints about scoreless streaks are the stupidest thing I've ever seen in my life as every team goes through those. Numerous people have looked up numbers and shown that we have no more than a majority of teams. Is it frustrating? **** and yes. Is it subpar coaching? No. It's coaching 18-22 year olds. And the problem is that the loud noise over **** like that drowns out the actual complaints that could be had. His substitution patterns drive me insane (and many others). Personally, I hate zone defense, but it's obvious that we don't switch up to it enough. Recruiting is very hit or miss, and there are legit questions on NIL that need to be answered. But the man has built a culture here and won more than anyone else in school history. And he's done it with duct tape and bailing wire. He's CU's MacGyver. But is that enough in this current climate?
So say we replace Tad, who would we go for? Before anyone even suggests it, no Kim English is not leaving Providence which is a much better job that pays more than CU will to come here. We're looking at guys who are doing well at mid major spots. We're not going to land the top guys - they're going to be poached by the major programs. I don't know enough about the ****ty Texas schools, but I'm thinking something along the lines of Chris Gerlufsen at San Francisco. So how does that move the needle? A "program builder" who isn't flashy is exactly what we have now. So how do we get something above that? We're going to have to pay through the nose to get someone who's willing to come to a recruiting dead zone, to a team with no history, in one of the hardest conferences in the country, which gets no attention from the surrounding area who plays in a stadium that is comparable to a lot of HS stadiums in Texas. So is RG going to tell Prime - "hey, I know I need you to carry our entire athletic department right now, but I need to take $10 mil from your budget to try to get the basketball team turned around so we can make the tournament 50-75% of the time"? **** no. RG knows that the hoops program is staying out of the police blotter, they're self sustaining and he doesn't have to pay attention and they're not embarrassing on a national level (because as embarrassed as we are this year, no one nationally has noticed, I can promise you that).
So tell me - who do we go get? Give me realistic names. Give me a realistic plan. Tell me where the money is coming from.
There is a LEGIT conversation to be had about if Tad should be moving on. Personally, I sat through enough false prophets and absolute **** teams that I'm willing to ride the wave with Tad for a bit longer. If we're going to actually start to give a **** about the hoops program, that conversation can get more serious. But if not, all we're doing is replacing a 2010 Honda Civic with a Range Rover that might be damn good but is more likely to break down on the side of the road. We're not talking football here where we need to swing for the fences. Safe and reliable is the way to go for hoops barring dramatic changes.
Yeah. I'll have to get to that post after work. Actually looking forward to seeing you compile all your thoughts in one place. It's a lot.
I'm where Goose is.
Buff_nc
Well-Known Member
I think you have to go the Prime Route, or crazy idea, the Nikola Jokic route. Become an international academy of sorts, and focus on International Players, and see if guys like Joker and Luka and others would help find a way to fund bringing over good International Club players, heck put Jokers name on it somehow.
I do not have any killer answers, so I think Change Agent is the only way to potentially kickstart things. Basketball is a lot less costly to make it all work out, so that is why the International angle was my only thought to mix things up. As for coach, find a popular former player to make things work.
Danny Manning is the biggest name, so maybe is Andre Miller at the Nuggets G-League Grand Rapids Gold?
This is great. Really. It captures some really good points that we (including me) sometimes miss or forget. Taking my current perspective and combining it with what you've presented, I think it's less about Tad needing to go and more about Tad changing (adjusting) his M.O. and thus the culture of the program. Part of this may be that we need to rethink our assistant coaches. I wish recruiting sites listed primary recruiters for basketball like they do for football. I'd like to know who does the heavy lifting out on the road. I also think things like handing off lineup responsibility to an assistant then watching it implode nightly, not capitalizing AT ALL on recent program and player success (no matter what the NIL budget really is), sounding like a curmudgeon when speaking about the new CBB landscape, or having zero fresh ideas or a visible desire to address issues, shines a negative light on where the program is going.
Like I said before, RG doesn't give a rat's ass where MBB is headed. It is what it is. I would like to see Tad take an obvious interest in where this program is headed and maybe where his legacy might end up. It wouldn't be fair for him to give it up after say, three horrible years in the Big12 and have that be what is remembered.
This guy sends me a dissertation while I'm trying to pick between clumber spaniel at the dog show -- more or less my reaction, hahaYeah. I'll have to get to that post after work. Actually looking forward to seeing you compile all your thoughts in one place. It's a lot.
Bryce Drew
I don't disagree with anything you're saying.
Instead of #FireTad talk, what we should be discussing is what inexpensive or free things CU could be doing that would help the program.
One thing that I think is needed and they've seen the master class being taught next door in the football office, is that basketball needs a media team. Tad doesn't care about that stuff and isn't a promoter. Think about how little fanfare there was around the NBA Draft last year. There's not enough engagement from CU hoops that reaches people where they are and I think that's a big part of why enthusiasm plateaued.
This is where Tad might start to lose me.
Every program needs a coach that embraces what NIL and revenue sharing means to the players. Even if the pathway is getting second tier guys who are good developmental plays to buy into Tadball, you still have to respect their time and work by getting them every dollar you can, and be excited about being able to do that for them.
I'd be really, really sad if the eventual article about Tad moving on has some quotes complaining about guys wanting to get paid like we've seen recently from Larrañaga and others on their way out.
Calipari even got fired for refusing to adapt. What he loved about coaching was getting freshmen to realize their potential. He has refused to take a mercenary approach of his team being mostly the best transfers money can buy plus 1 or 2 prized freshmen.
That wouldn't make me sad exactly, it's pretty clear and honestly reasonable. It just doesn't work today
Well, at least you won't be throwing time outs at me, we'll be out of them. Tad's taking his shipping container of leftover timeouts with him
Buffsbball
Well-Known Member
A few fun things to point out for this chat!
Missouri Basketball 22-23: 25-10 Second Round of NCAA Tournament
Missouri Basketball 23-24 8-24 (0-18 in conference)
Missouri Basketball 24-25: 18-6 projected as a 7 seed
Dennis Gates was the coach all 3 years. Why do people always assume coaching change is the best way to performance increase. Tad has every reason to right the ship.
Another fun example: Vanderbilt Basketball
Bryce Drew went 0-18 in league as Vanderbilt's coach in 2018-19- He was fired. He's since been hired by GCU and has gone to back to back NCAA tournaments including the second weekend. Vanderbilt afterwards had two seasons where they were still an SEC bottom feeder and seem to only be finding their footing this year two coaches later. 7 years later.
Again this year is a throw away. We've known guard play was light- everything I've heard is that Josiah Sanders is going to be CU's next top tier guard, I think we will have several capable guards next year and can return to NIT rangeand borderline tournament team. I trust the possibility of Tad doing that then a low tier hire, who will rebuilt the whole roster and more than likely have another several down years before a maybe possibility of getting us back to the NIT/Tournament range. What's the upside there?
Missouri Basketball 22-23: 25-10 Second Round of NCAA Tournament
Missouri Basketball 23-24 8-24 (0-18 in conference)
Missouri Basketball 24-25: 18-6 projected as a 7 seed
Dennis Gates was the coach all 3 years. Why do people always assume coaching change is the best way to performance increase. Tad has every reason to right the ship.
Another fun example: Vanderbilt Basketball
Bryce Drew went 0-18 in league as Vanderbilt's coach in 2018-19- He was fired. He's since been hired by GCU and has gone to back to back NCAA tournaments including the second weekend. Vanderbilt afterwards had two seasons where they were still an SEC bottom feeder and seem to only be finding their footing this year two coaches later. 7 years later.
Again this year is a throw away. We've known guard play was light- everything I've heard is that Josiah Sanders is going to be CU's next top tier guard, I think we will have several capable guards next year and can return to NIT rangeand borderline tournament team. I trust the possibility of Tad doing that then a low tier hire, who will rebuilt the whole roster and more than likely have another several down years before a maybe possibility of getting us back to the NIT/Tournament range. What's the upside there?
Say what now? That Mizzou analogy is a dog that does not hunt. Their roster core is made up of solid transfer players from CBB powerhouses and stud transfers from mid majors. C'mon now..
As I keep saying, Tad's not going anywhere. UNLESS, he refuses to adapt to the new CBB environment. We will have a similar record next year if he simply takes 5 freshman and pairs them with the players we likely have returning. That would be a two year horror show and would mean he's not willing to adapt.
So maybe firing a coach for a poorly constructed roster and bad season after 15 years of winning at a program record level is an overreaction?
I'm perfectly fine with Tad having the opportunity to adapt and move forward with the CU program if he wants to do it. It's not like he's saying he refuses to play the NIL game or heavily utilize the transfer market.
Heck, we lost almost all production and players who saw the court last season. With that, I still think we were only 1 portal miss away from being an NIT level team this season, but didn't get the dynamic ball handler & floor general this roster needed.
So maybe firing a coach for a poorly constructed roster and bad season after 15 years of winning at a program record level is an overreaction?
I'm perfectly fine with Tad having the opportunity to adapt and move forward with the CU program if he wants to do it. It's not like he's saying he refuses to play the NIL game or heavily utilize the transfer market.
Heck, we lost almost all production and players who saw the court last season. With that, I still think we were only 1 portal miss away from being an NIT level team this season, but didn't get the dynamic ball handler & floor general this roster needed.
CU is 104th in KenPom this year, and there are only 4 "Power 4" Conference teams ranked below them. I think we're being kind to say that we were only 1 portal miss away from being an NIT team....unless that player is an all Big-12 level guard.
I think it's hard to quantify what fewer turnovers, more penetration and more cohesiveness translates to. We're missing that but have a solid roster of spot up shooters and glue guys with excellent FT shooting and rim protection. It would be a completely different team. And I don't think it would have to be an All Big 12 level guy - a PG like Nate Tomlinson would have been transformative imo.
We needed three more legit players this past offseason to be honest. A true PG, a wing shooter and a defending big who could rebound. All three could've been mid major up and comers. They didn't need to be P5 players. There were dozens upon dozens that fit the bill and could be had for reasonable NIL. Instead, we got a D2 player, an NAIA player and Carrington on scholly. That's fvcking lazy work. EOS.
Buffsbball
Well-Known Member
So basically the part of the analogy that doesn't land is Mizzou has a way higher NIL budget than CU? What should Tad be doing about that?
What does work- Of Mizzou's rotation:
Tamar Bates: On Mizzou's zero conference win team is their leading scorer- so hold over and retention
Anthony Robinson II- a sophomore that Gates recruited that was a low 4 high 3 star that's taken a big Jump
Trent Pierce- a sophomore who was top 75-100 national recruit having a sophomore jump- was a retention from last year
Caleb Grill- was injury proned and having an amazing 3 point shooting year in his second year in the program
To your point Mark Mitchell and Tony Perkins came from Duke and Iowa where they had roles- Mizzou can afford that CU can't. But overall 4 of top 6 rotation players were on their winless conference team from last year.
SO back to CU all things that could happen: Dak, Sebi, and Smith take jumps next year after their first year of true rotation minutes, Ruff stays the same on the bench. Sanders comes ready to play as expected. Crawford and Kossaras turn into a rotation player next year and Diop adds an offensive move but plays rotation big minutes. Tad gets a veteran ball handler to help hand the keys to Sanders. These are all very realistic expectations.
We've been absolutely terrible at the end of halves this year and we've shown fight to make games of things in the second half.
Jak should have fit the bill for a wing shooter, and has at times.
Baskin has been ok as the dollar store version of LOB, I'm guessing LOB's Columbine team dominated Baskin's Pomona squad about 5 years ago (are they still both in JeffCo 5A?)
Malone is a disappointment. In isolation, maybe a worthwhile flyer based on his production. In the context of Baskin/Jak and no PG it's tough to have that be the flyer.
Carrington is completely fine as scholly #15, it's not as though he really was the either/or between getting a certified stud.
Part of me suspects that Tad was a little intentional in getting Jak, Malone, and Baskin for 1 year and 1 year only when he struck out on better options, knowing it would free up more spots after the lost season.
So, say we get zero offseason transfers next year (hypothetical) and Baskin and Malone get another year and Tad opts to keep them. All 15 schollys would be taken. Even with another year experience for these guys, I don't see us winning more than 13 games next year. You have to cut some dead weight and fill some spots with seasoned, solid transfers. And in this scenario, you have a true freshman running at PG. Would you be okay with this lineup?
Starters
Dak
Diop
Rancik
Sanders (Fr)
Ruffin
Bench
Smith
Malone (granted an additional year?)
Baskin (granted an additional year?)
Carrington
Kosarras
Crawford (RsFr)
Holland (Fr)
Fawaz (Fr)
Johnson (Fr)
Inman (Fr)
No room for Anderson (?)
Not to drag this on (but yeah, to drag it on), you can't just skim over the fact that Bates came over from Indiana (that's not LaGrange, IN), Grill from Iowa State, Mitchell from Duke, Perkins from Iowa, and Warrick was scoring almost 20ppg at NKU for 4 years straight. They weren't at WSU, LaGrange and Colorado Mesa. I guess my point is we need to live somewhere in the middle. And we have the funds to do that. BUT, do we have the desire to do that?