Tad has to go

[torero]

2017 - no ncaa tournament
2018 - no ncaa tournament
2019 - no ncaa tournament

Try again.

This was a bad basketball team in December into January. Go back and look at my posts, I say just as much. That, unless your blind as a ****ing bat or being purposely dishonest, obviously got way better with every important contributor coming back. If this team doesn't make the NCAA tournament next year, I'll stop defending Tad. I will never stop being a Tad fan, but I'll stop defending him. Your comment "there is no evidence it getting better" is indefensible.

 

[manhattanbuff]

This was a bad basketball team in December into January. Go back and look at my posts, I say just as much. That, unless your blind as a ****ing bat or being purposely dishonest, obviously got way better with every important contributor coming back. If this team doesn't make the NCAA tournament next year, I'll stop defending Tad. I will never stop being a Tad fan, but I'll stop defending him. Your comment "there is no evidence it getting better" is indefensible.

The standard is the NCAA tournament. While I agree with you that the team made incremental in-season gains from the earlier part of the year (not difficult to do since they were abysmal), the team still failed in its number one objective to reach the NCAA tournament.

Boyle is paid a lot of money to make the NCAA tournament. When he doesn’t for three consecutive seasons, that is a serious red flag. I’m happy to read that you have a much more balanced approach about Boyle than the “coach for life” crowd.

There’s no denying his past achievements moved the program in a better direction. In my view, for a person in his position, if you’re not getting better, you’re getting worse. This is demonstrated in his record of making the tournament the past three years after doing so consistently before.

 

[onealcd]

The standard is the NCAA tournament. While I agree with you that the team made incremental in-season gains from the earlier part of the year (not difficult to do since they were abysmal), the team still failed in its number one objective to reach the NCAA tournament.

Boyle is paid a lot of money to make the NCAA tournament. When he doesn’t for three consecutive seasons, that is a serious red flag. I’m happy to read that you have a much more balanced approach about Boyle than the “coach for life” crowd.

There’s no denying his past achievements moved the program in a better direction. In my view, for a person in his position, if you’re not getting better, you’re getting worse. This is demonstrated in his record of making the tournament the past three years after doing so consistently before.

Isn't he the 10th highest paid coach in the conference?

 

[torero]

The standard is the NCAA tournament. While I agree with you that the team made incremental in-season gains from the earlier part of the year (not difficult to do since they were abysmal), the team still failed in its number one objective to reach the NCAA tournament.

Boyle is paid a lot of money to make the NCAA tournament. When he doesn’t for three consecutive seasons, that is a serious red flag. I’m happy to read that you have a much more balanced approach about Boyle than the “coach for life” crowd.

There’s no denying his past achievements moved the program in a better direction. In my view, for a person in his position, if you’re not getting better, you’re getting worse. This is demonstrated in his record of making the tournament the past three years after doing so consistently before.

So... there is evidence that it is getting better?

 

[Scotch]

Maybe you don’t since you’re a moron

THAT'S THE SPIRIT!!!!!

You’ve got a camera into my bedroom? Wow. Good one, champ! I hope you enjoy the show.

You realize the irony of your second paragraph statement, right? Maybe you don’t since you’re a moron, so let me make it easy for you.You already have your mind made up that Boyle’s past achievements excuse his current deficiencies.

This is why you’re bad at discussion. It’s on YOU to make an argument why we should ignore three consecutive seasons of non-NCAA tournament making performances. Instead, you’ve pled blind allegiance to a coach who hasn’t won anything. You’ve also immediately gone to the “this guy brings up the fact that our coach’s performance has fallen substantially, so I will say that he doesn’t have sex” retort. This is deflection away from the real issue and frankly adds nothing other than me blasting you further.

We have a coach stuck in neutral with no evidence that it’s getting better. You think a tournament that can hardly draw fan attendance or decent non-gambling/non-attached market viewers matters at all. It doesn’t.

I actually agree with some on here about the results the past 3 seasons, although last season was quite obviously a rebuilding one so Tad got a pass from me. The Derrick White year and this year certainly left a lot to be desired, and by the way I've said as much. I've been critical of the offense since Tad got here, I'm not crazy about Wright inbounding the ball under the hoop(especially at the end of games, cough Wash St. cough). I wish they'd use more pick and roll, and screen more to get shooters open, etc etc. I'm also not thrilled that we could only get a 5 seed in Vegas given the poor state of the Conference this season.

Once again, if they don't make the NCAA Tournament next year I'd say its time to openly wonder if the program is going the right direction.

I'll also stop short of saying Boyle needs to be let go unless the wheels completely fall off. He's a damn fine coach fighting an uphill battle at a school that doesn't care much about his sport.

 

[manhattanbuff]

So... there is evidence that it is getting better?

I view the season in its totality. Whether the team hits their target is the determining factor for improvement. Marginal in-season improvements don’t mean much. When a former honor roll student goes from being an F student to a D+ student within the year, the conclusion isn’t “at least he’s getting better!”

The team has a primary goal. It did not meet that goal this season.

The team has not met that goal for three consecutive seasons.

If the team continuously does not achieve that goal this season after missing last season and the season before, that is not improvement. That is stagnation.

 

[MtnBuff]

The standard is the NCAA tournament. While I agree with you that the team made incremental in-season gains from the earlier part of the year (not difficult to do since they were abysmal), the team still failed in its number one objective to reach the NCAA tournament.

Boyle is paid a lot of money to make the NCAA tournament. When he doesn’t for three consecutive seasons, that is a serious red flag. I’m happy to read that you have a much more balanced approach about Boyle than the “coach for life” crowd.

There’s no denying his past achievements moved the program in a better direction. In my view, for a person in his position, if you’re not getting better, you’re getting worse. This is demonstrated in his record of making the tournament the past three years after doing so consistently before.

A) Tad has proven, mostly early in his time at CU that this program can qualify for the NCAA tourney. That is not an unattainable standard.
B) This team is now fully Tad's team. Every player is a guy that Tad approved of recruiting and was active in recruiting. Every assistant coach is someone who Tad has approved of as a part of his staff.

I like Tad and want him to be our coach but no NCAA tourney for the past 3 years is significant. Next year will be telling. With the returning talent we should have no excuse not to make the tourney next year. Short of maybe Kin getting hurt we should make the tourney even with one or more injuries and by the way most teams in the tourney had players miss all or part of the year with injury. That is a part of the game. Tad having control of the roster is also responsible if we lack the depth to overcome injury.

Bottom line question is what level are people willing to accept from CU basketball. Is winning 18-20 games a year including a bunch of low end OOC games each year plus a trip to a tourney like the NIT acceptable or should we expect to compete for the NCAA tourney at least frequently. I am not interested in supporting a mediocre program.

I believe that Tad can lead us to a level which tourney trips are a regular expectation. If he doesn't reach that level though then his long term future should not be at CU.

 

[Denver_sc]

Boyle is paid a lot of money to make the NCAA tournament.

All due respect, this is ****ing stupid. Out of schools that disclose the salary of their basketball coaches, Boyle ranks 59th. This does not include most private schools like USC, Stanford, and some other schools like Penn State and Pittsburgh do not disclose salaries either. There are definitely 64 schools who pay their coaches more and probably 68, which as I’m sure you know is the number of teams in the tournament.

Also we’ve been over it ad nauseum but salary is only one of the demonstrative ways that CU does not support the basketball program commensurate with peers.

You get what you pay for, and CU should consider itself lucky to get into the tournament field 43% of the time with that amount of support.

 

[manhattanbuff]

All due respect, this is ****ing stupid. Out of schools that disclose the salary of their basketball coaches, Boyle ranks 59th. This does not include most private schools like USC, Stanford, and some other schools like Penn State and Pittsburgh do not disclose salaries either. There are definitely 64 schools who pay their coaches more and probably 68, which as I’m sure you know is the number of teams in the tournament.

Also we’ve been over it ad nauseum but salary is only one of the demonstrative ways that CU does not support the basketball program commensurate with peers.

You get what you pay for, and CU should consider itself lucky to get into the tournament field 43% of the time with that amount of support.

Source? 59th in base comp? Total comp?

 

[Denver_sc]

Source? 59th in base comp? Total comp?

Total.

He’s 59th in base comp too.

 

[manhattanbuff]

Total.

He’s 60th in base comp.

Link goes to an article about John Calipari.

After re-reading his actual contract, I still think he gets paid a lot of money. I agree that he is not paid as well paid 17% of Division One coaches. They still admit 68 teams in the tournament. We play in a high profile conference that’s supposed to do something good for us. I am not demanding that we be more than one of the best 68. We’re not getting performance for what we’re paying. So, that means we should keep him?

 

[Goose]

Link goes to an article about John Calipari.

After re-reading his actual contract, I still think he gets paid a lot of money. I agree that he is not paid as well paid 17% of Division One coaches. They still admit 68 teams in the tournament. We play in a high profile conference that’s supposed to do something good for us. I am not demanding that we be more than one of the best 68. We’re not getting performance for what we’re paying. So, that means we should keep him?

One of the best 37 teams. There are 32 automatic bids - 31 we physically can't win. So we have to win our conference or be one of the best 36 (or 45 if you want to be a little more accurate) teams in the country. Still not impossible, still harder than 68.

 

[manhattanbuff]

One of the best 37 teams. There are 32 automatic bids - 31 we physically can't win. So we have to win our conference or be one of the best 36 (or 45 if you want to be a little more accurate) teams in the country. Still not impossible, still harder than 68.

Right. But Hoops is the sport with the greatest parity and merit.

Is the argument that if we paid Tad more, we’d perform better?

 

['99]

Right. But Hoops is the sport with the greatest parity and merit.

Is the argument that if we paid Tad more, we’d perform better?

The argument is will CU find a better coach than Tad at that salary and limited AD commitment to hoops that comes with the job?

 

[manhattanbuff]

The argument is will CU find a better coach than Tad at that salary and limited AD commitment to hoops that comes with the job?

This is something we can test. We can look at the last three fields.

What rate of coaches made the tournament more than once in the last three seasons in more difficult circumstances than Colorado? (i.e. they’re from a conference with one berth).

At what rate did coaches with similar salaries make the tournament?

At what rate did coaches with lower salaries make the tournament?

Bball outside of the elite 4-5 blue bloods is on a lower scale than football. I know that we fired a coach last year and hired a better coach for much less. Given the amount of talent in the Bball coaching ranks, I wonder how true this is for Colorado Basketball.

 

[Goose]

 

[WarBuff]

From what we are hearing, coaches compensation may take second place to player compensation when success is being discussed.

 

[hokiehead]

Not sure I agree. let's look at data.

if you look at total regular season performance, conference regular season performance, conference tourney performance and post-season performance, the last four years are starkly less impressive than the Boyle's first four years.

first four seasons at CU (note 2011 was Boyle's first year and CU's last year in the XII):

• post season tournament each year (3 NCAA, 1 NIT)
• at or above .500 in conference play each year
• 20+ wins each year
• conference tourney final round: 1 championship, 2 semi-finals, 1 quarter finals

last four complete seasons at CU:

• missed post season once, only made NCAA once
• < .500 in conference play for 3/4 seasons
• >= 20 wins only once
• conference tourney final round: 4 quarter-finals

I'm not a Boyle hater, but neither do I think he should be feeling safe and comfortable given performance over the last four years. My projection for this year is that 2018/19 looks more like "last four years" than it does "first four years". I'd be ecstatic to be wrong.

I do think Boyle has done a good job of keeping out of NCAA trouble and a good job of recruiting and coaching players who don't get into legal problems that embarrass the university. I couldn't immediately find information on how well he graduates players, but my perception based on following the team for six years now is that it's not awesome (someone please correct me if I'm wrong).

if anyone has ready access to Boyle's recruiting class ranks by year, that would be interesting as well. are we holding steady, rising, falling or bouncing?

Season	Team	Overall	Conference	Standing	Postseason
Northern Colorado Bears (Big Sky Conference) (2006–2010)
2006–07	Northern Colorado	4–24	2–14	9th
2007–08	Northern Colorado	13–16	6–10	T–7th
2008–09	Northern Colorado	14–18	8–8	5th
2009–10	Northern Colorado	25–8	12–4	2nd	CIT Quarterfinal
Northern Colorado:	56–66 (.459)	28–36 (.438)
Colorado Buffaloes (Big 12 Conference) (2010–2011)
2010–11	Colorado	24–14	8–8	T–5th	NIT Semifinal
Colorado Buffaloes (Pac-12 Conference) (2011–present)
2011–12	Colorado	24–12	11–7	T–5th	NCAA Division I Round of 32
2012–13	Colorado	21–12	10–8	5th	NCAA Division I Round of 64
2013–14	Colorado	23–12	10–8	T–3rd	NCAA Division I Round of 64
2014–15	Colorado	16–18	7–11	T–8th	CBI Quarterfinal
2015–16	Colorado	22–12	10–8	5th	NCAA Division I Round of 64
2016–17	Colorado	19–15	8–10	7th	NIT First Round
2017–18	Colorado	17–15	8–10	T–8th
2018–19	Colorado	8–3	0–0
Colorado:	174–113 (.606)	72–70 (.507)

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

wiki link

updated, because I like data to back up arguments.

A note, I continue to be luke-warm on Boyle: not calling for a replacement, but not willing to even jokingly talk contract extension.

Spoiler: I'm an idiot -- thanks Toreobuff for correcting me

I do think that anyone who considers this season to be a "success", in which we finsihed < .500 in conference play, should re-evaluate their criteria. Going below .500 in conference play is not OK to me, even if the team gets hot and makes a run in the conference tourney. especially when the conference is having, by some standards, its worst seasons in recent history. especially when it's happened 4 out of the 5 most recent seasons.

I also note in my quoted post I requested that if anyone had Boyle's graduation rates and recruiting rates over his time at CU, I thought that would be interesting to complement a discussion around his overall effectiveness here. that request stands.

I also note that Boyle has continued to keep CU out of NCAA trouble, and that means something.

data, updated deletions in strike-through, additions in red

first four seasons at CU (note 2011 was Boyle's first year and CU's last year in the XII):

• post season tournament each year (3 NCAA, 1 NIT)
• at or above .500 in conference play each year
• 20+ wins each year
• conference tourney final round: 1 championship, 2 semi-finals, 1 quarter finals

last four five complete seasons at CU:

• missed post season once, only made NCAA once
• < .500 in conference play for 3/4 3/5 seasons
• >= 20 wins only once only twice
• conference tourney final round: 4 quarter-finals, 1 semi-final

Colorado Buffaloes (Big 12 Conference) (2010–2011)
2010–11	Colorado	24–14	8–8	T–5th	NIT Semifinal
Colorado Buffaloes (Pac-12 Conference) (2011–present)
2011–12	Colorado	24–12	11–7	T–5th	NCAA Division I Round of 32
2012–13	Colorado	21–12	10–8	5th	NCAA Division I Round of 64
2013–14	Colorado	23–12	10–8	T–3rd	NCAA Division I Round of 64
2014–15	Colorado	16–18	7–11	T–8th	CBI Quarterfinal
2015–16	Colorado	22–12	10–8	5th	NCAA Division I Round of 64
2016–17	Colorado	19–15	8–10	7th	NIT First Round
2017–18	Colorado	17–15	8–10	T–8th
2018–19	Colorado	23–13	10–8	5th	NIT Quarterfinal
Colorado:	189–123 (.606)	82–78 (.513)

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

wiki link

 

[torero]

I do think that anyone who considers this season to be a "success", in which we finsihed < .500 in conference play, should re-evaluate their criteria. Going below .500 in conference play is not OK to me, even if the team gets hot and makes a run in the conference tourney. especially when the conference is having, by some standards, its worst seasons in recent history. especially when it's happened 4 out of the 5 most recent seasons.

We were 10-8 in conference, 12-9 if you count the conference tournament. We did not finish below .500. Everything after is thus wrong.

 

[hokiehead]

We were 10-8 in conference, 12-9 if you count the conference tournament. We did not finish below .500. Everything after is thus wrong.

you're right -- I read that wrong. corrected above. thanks!

edit: actually, not everything after is wrong, just that part. at least I think.

 

[Goose]

We were 10-8 in conference, 12-9 if you count the conference tournament. We did not finish below .500. Everything after is thus wrong.

82-78 overall in conference and only 3 losing seasons (8-10, 8-10, 7-11).

 

[Da Lama]

updated, because I like data to back up arguments.

A note, I continue to be luke-warm on Boyle: not calling for a replacement, but not willing to even jokingly talk contract extension.

Spoiler: I'm an idiot -- thanks Toreobuff for correcting me

I do think that anyone who considers this season to be a "success", in which we finsihed < .500 in conference play, should re-evaluate their criteria. Going below .500 in conference play is not OK to me, even if the team gets hot and makes a run in the conference tourney. especially when the conference is having, by some standards, its worst seasons in recent history. especially when it's happened 4 out of the 5 most recent seasons.

I also note in my quoted post I requested that if anyone had Boyle's graduation rates and recruiting rates over his time at CU, I thought that would be interesting to complement a discussion around his overall effectiveness here. that request stands.

I also note that Boyle has continued to keep CU out of NCAA trouble, and that means something.

data, updated deletions in strike-through, additions in red

first four seasons at CU (note 2011 was Boyle's first year and CU's last year in the XII):

• post season tournament each year (3 NCAA, 1 NIT)
• at or above .500 in conference play each year
• 20+ wins each year
• conference tourney final round: 1 championship, 2 semi-finals, 1 quarter finals

last four five complete seasons at CU:

• missed post season once, only made NCAA once
• < .500 in conference play for 3/4 3/5 seasons
• >= 20 wins only once only twice
• conference tourney final round: 4 quarter-finals, 1 semi-final

Colorado Buffaloes (Big 12 Conference) (2010–2011)
2010–11	Colorado	24–14	8–8	T–5th	NIT Semifinal
Colorado Buffaloes (Pac-12 Conference) (2011–present)
2011–12	Colorado	24–12	11–7	T–5th	NCAA Division I Round of 32
2012–13	Colorado	21–12	10–8	5th	NCAA Division I Round of 64
2013–14	Colorado	23–12	10–8	T–3rd	NCAA Division I Round of 64
2014–15	Colorado	16–18	7–11	T–8th	CBI Quarterfinal
2015–16	Colorado	22–12	10–8	5th	NCAA Division I Round of 64
2016–17	Colorado	19–15	8–10	7th	NIT First Round
2017–18	Colorado	17–15	8–10	T–8th
2018–19	Colorado	23–13	10–8	5th	NIT Quarterfinal
Colorado:	189–123 (.606)	82–78 (.513)

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

wiki link

But how does this compare to to all other Pac 12 coaches during the same time period? Some dude on Twitter was posting stat rankings for the conference over the past 8-10 years and it seemed like Colorado was right there in the top 4 in every category. wish I remembered the twitter handle...

 

[hokiehead]

But how does this compare to to all other Pac 12 coaches during the same time period? Some dude on Twitter was posting stat rankings for the conference over the past 8-10 years and it seemed like Colorado was right there in the top 4 in every category. wish I remembered the twitter handle...

Good question. Seems like the kind of thing that @tante would be on top of.

 

[tante]

But how does this compare to to all other Pac 12 coaches during the same time period? Some dude on Twitter was posting stat rankings for the conference over the past 8-10 years and it seemed like Colorado was right there in the top 4 in every category. wish I remembered the twitter handle...

Tad has been very consistent in conference, so while we haven't achieved the heights that some schools have, there has been three schools that has never bottomed out in the PAC:12; Arizona, Colorado, and Oregon. (I consider bottoming out as 6 or less wins).

Team	Most Wins	Least Wins
Arizona	16	8
ASU	5	12
Cal	2	13
Colorado	11	7
Oregon	16	10
OSU	10	4
Stanford	11	6
UCLA	13	6
USC	12	1
Utah	3	13
Washington	15	2
WSU	7	1

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Some interesting numbers and here are some of my opinions.
Dana Altman saved his job with a PAC:12 tournament and sweet 16 run. Two years with 10 wins in conference and zero tournaments would have Oregon looking around.
When you look at the yearly breakdown, there is always a new coaching bump, where the coach increases the win total and then slowly decreases. Look for UCLA to have more than 9 conference wins next year and challenge for the conference within two.
Cal has destroyed their basketball program, will take years to recover. It took Utah three seasons to dig out of their hole, Cal will take longer since they don't have the resources right now.

Team	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018
Arizona	12	12	15	16	12	16	14	8
Arizona State	6	9	10	9	5	7	8	12
California	13	12	10	7	12	10	2	3
Colorado	11	10	10	7	10	8	8	10
Oregon	13	12	10	13	14	16	10	10
Oregon State	7	4	8	8	9	1	7	10
Stanford	10	9	10	9	8	6	11	8
UCLA	11	13	12	11	6	15	11	9
USC	1	9	2	3	9	10	12	8
Utah	3	5	9	13	13	11	11	11
Washington	14	9	9	5	9	2	10	15
Washington State	7	4	3	7	1	6	4	4

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

While I really appreciate the data/investigation provided by Tante, does it bother anyone else that the graph colors don't approximate the school's colors?

 

[tante]

While I really appreciate the data/investigation provided by Tante, does it bother anyone else that the graph colors don't approximate the school's colors?

Colorado is gold, no other school matters.

 

[DBT]

Good Lord!!

 

[68buffs]

Colorado is gold, no other school matters.

Seems some of you have never learned this.
I think Tad has a little MM in him, he needs to improve his staff. I'm not talking about Kim either, a legit big man coach would be huge for the team. It's time for MR to either find a HC job or move on, S&C needs to be greatly improved. I don't see the team reaching the tournament next year without at least one change.

 

[Goose]

Tad Stan for life checking in here.

Not sure why this is still being discussed other than ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ offseason, but here are a few facts.

1.) AD has no money. If they did, we would have hired an entire college football coaching staff as opposed to a badass head coach, solid coordinators and 30,000 quality guys.
2.) Tad is cheap. See Tante's numbers.
3.) CU hoops is making money under Tad
4.) CU hoops overperforms their budget
5.)

I'm #TadForLife and not a real big RG fan, but it's pretty clear that RG is happy with him and has no plans. So unless the wheels come off for two straight years, everyone get used to the status quo.

 

[buffs233]

Tad Stan for life checking in here.

Not sure why this is still being discussed other than ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ offseason, but here are a few facts.

1.) AD has no money. If they did, we would have hired an entire college football coaching staff as opposed to a badass head coach, solid coordinators and 30,000 quality guys.
2.) Tad is cheap. See Tante's numbers.
3.) CU hoops is making money under Tad
4.) CU hoops overperforms their budget
5.)

I'm #TadForLife and not a real big RG fan, but it's pretty clear that RG is happy with him and has no plans. So unless the wheels come off for two straight years, everyone get used to the status quo.

Curious - why are you not a fan of RG?