Coaching Hot Seats

[gymman1031]

People keep mentioning Galloway. And not saying that is wrong. But I really think he sticks it out a bit longer and waits to see what happens at Syracuse.

[Farfromgeneva]

Not even just Cuse what Galloway did at Jax and was a strong assistant at Prov previously put him well up there list of young HCs for major jobs when they come up. Maybe one year isn’t enough but definitely if he strings two together and his class next year is strong, then Galloway is going to be hitting that list that includes Torpey, Cassesse, Polley, Chemotti, McMinn etc for when the bigger gigs might pop up. Tierney may want to give it to Brown but that doesn’t mean Denver wouldn’t open it up. Lots of folks seem to think Conroy and Tambroni are on their way out. Corrigan cant have more than 5yrs left. Dano is also getting up there.

[gymman1031]

Not even just Cuse what Galloway did at Jax and was a strong assistant at Prov previously put him well up there list of young HCs for major jobs when they come up. Maybe one year isn’t enough but definitely if he strings two together and his class next year is strong, then Galloway is going to be hitting that list that includes Torpey, Cassesse, Polley, Chemotti, McMinn etc for when the bigger gigs might pop up. Tierney may want to give it to Brown but that doesn’t mean Denver wouldn’t open it up. Lots of folks seem to think Conroy and Tambroni are on their way out. Corrigan cant have more than 5yrs left. Dano is also getting up there.

Chemotti, I say, will be the next man at Duke.

[jrn19]

None of the jobs open so far tempt me if I’m Galloway. St. John’s just isn’t a good gig. Providence isn’t half bad but I think I can get better.

If Hofstra were to open up if Tierney retired, I’d consider that one. And obviously jump at any Big Ten/ACC job.

[LongIslandLacks]

I can only ask that you carefully read what I post and resist going bonkers with wild hyperbole and obtuse extrapolations.

And I ask that you don't contradict yourself, making it difficult to understand your points. Fair?

Recruiting is not a discriminator among coaches for a place like Michigan, in my opinion. Whoever coaches there will get really strong players coming out of high school. Paul had classes “ranked” in the top ten from time to time. Conry inherited those players and recruited other highly ranked players. Some end up flaming out—like at other schools. The bottom line is that the coach owns the results.

Agree. But Michigan has been unable to land a single elite recruit. And to be clear, I don't mean what IL thinks is an elite recruit when they are in High School..I mean an actual, real life, elite D1 player. Until they start pulling them down, no amount of coaching will get Michigan out of the BigTen bottom half, so long as the rest of the teams keep pulling down the Aments, Wisnauskas, and Myers level players.

Michigan isn't getting those players yet. If and when they do, ANY D1 caliber coach, including Conry, will get them more BigTen w's. This is a simple game. Maryland isn't blowing teams out because of coaching. They're blowing teams out because they have the best players at pretty much every position on the field, no matter who they play. Give Conry that roster, and he's heading to the Final Four....same goes for every D1 coach.

And I am not talking about whether the coach develops an AA. I am talking about finishing higher than LAST PLACE in conference since the conference existed. And at a place with the best facilities in the conference. (Caveat for OSU because I understand they are getting new facilities and do not know if they will surpass Michigan’s).

Clearly elite recruits care about things other than facilities.

We will have to disagree re coaching. I’ve seen great coaches take purportedly less talented teams to championships way too often to think the coach might not be the most important piece to the puzzle.

Tillman has taken solid recruits and made them keys to success. He would not be where he is without having made good recruits into excellent players and without creating a culture that expects to win. There are very few kids in any class who are “elite” and above their peers.

What do “elite” recruits care about? If it is just lacrosse, then maybe they just go with what’s been successful recently. If they are thinking beyond the next four years, then lots of factors at play.

Academics? Michigan is the top school in the Big 10, save perhaps Hopkins which is a totally different college experience. The difference between a Michigan and a Maryland degree is a chasm. Same re Rutgers and Penn State. God bless Ohio State on this criteria.

A job? Michigan has the biggest alumni network in the world.

Fun? Would you rather be in Ann Arbor during football season in the fall than in Baltimore, New Jersey, or College Park—please don’t say no.

The Coach? That’s tough competition in the Big 10.

Facilities, by the way, provide the means to improve—Michigan’s lacrosse team has its own dedicated weight facility, including rehab/recovery equipment that most ACC football teams would die for. Put an experienced D1 lacrosse coach there and they finish other than last place in the league.

Clear enough?

[gymman1031]

I can only ask that you carefully read what I post and resist going bonkers with wild hyperbole and obtuse extrapolations.

And I ask that you don't contradict yourself, making it difficult to understand your points. Fair?

Recruiting is not a discriminator among coaches for a place like Michigan, in my opinion. Whoever coaches there will get really strong players coming out of high school. Paul had classes “ranked” in the top ten from time to time. Conry inherited those players and recruited other highly ranked players. Some end up flaming out—like at other schools. The bottom line is that the coach owns the results.

Agree. But Michigan has been unable to land a single elite recruit. And to be clear, I don't mean what IL thinks is an elite recruit when they are in High School..I mean an actual, real life, elite D1 player. Until they start pulling them down, no amount of coaching will get Michigan out of the BigTen bottom half, so long as the rest of the teams keep pulling down the Aments, Wisnauskas, and Myers level players.

Michigan isn't getting those players yet. If and when they do, ANY D1 caliber coach, including Conry, will get them more BigTen w's. This is a simple game. Maryland isn't blowing teams out because of coaching. They're blowing teams out because they have the best players at pretty much every position on the field, no matter who they play. Give Conry that roster, and he's heading to the Final Four....same goes for every D1 coach.

And I am not talking about whether the coach develops an AA. I am talking about finishing higher than LAST PLACE in conference since the conference existed. And at a place with the best facilities in the conference. (Caveat for OSU because I understand they are getting new facilities and do not know if they will surpass Michigan’s).

Clearly elite recruits care about things other than facilities.

We will have to disagree re coaching. I’ve seen great coaches take purportedly less talented teams to championships way too often to think the coach might not be the most important piece to the puzzle.

Tillman has taken solid recruits and made them keys to success. He would not be where he is without having made good recruits into excellent players and without creating a culture that expects to win. There are very few kids in any class who are “elite” and above their peers.

What do “elite” recruits care about? If it is just lacrosse, then maybe they just go with what’s been successful recently. If they are thinking beyond the next four years, then lots of factors at play.

Academics? Michigan is the top school in the Big 10, save perhaps Hopkins which is a totally different college experience. The difference between a Michigan and a Maryland degree is a chasm. Same re Rutgers and Penn State. God bless Ohio State on this criteria.

A job? Michigan has the biggest alumni network in the world.

Fun? Would you rather be in Ann Arbor during football season in the fall than in Baltimore, New Jersey, or College Park—please don’t say no.

The Coach? That’s tough competition in the Big 10.

Facilities, by the way, provide the means to improve—Michigan’s lacrosse team has its own dedicated weight facility, including rehab/recovery equipment that most ACC football teams would die for. Put an experienced D1 lacrosse coach there and they finish other than last place in the league.

Clear enough?

You make some great points. Michigan has a ton to sell in recruiting. AND, Conry is doing a fine job in that department. No, star-rankings don't always mean everything. But anyone who thinks he hasn't been getting very good talent since his arrival is crazy. Therefore, I will repeat what I continue to say:

If much more time goes by and he hasn't:

-led his team to at least ten wins in a season
-led his team to a top four spot in conference at the end of the regular season

Michigan needs to at least start thinking about a change.

[Farfromgeneva]

I can only ask that you carefully read what I post and resist going bonkers with wild hyperbole and obtuse extrapolations.

And I ask that you don't contradict yourself, making it difficult to understand your points. Fair?

Recruiting is not a discriminator among coaches for a place like Michigan, in my opinion. Whoever coaches there will get really strong players coming out of high school. Paul had classes “ranked” in the top ten from time to time. Conry inherited those players and recruited other highly ranked players. Some end up flaming out—like at other schools. The bottom line is that the coach owns the results.

Agree. But Michigan has been unable to land a single elite recruit. And to be clear, I don't mean what IL thinks is an elite recruit when they are in High School..I mean an actual, real life, elite D1 player. Until they start pulling them down, no amount of coaching will get Michigan out of the BigTen bottom half, so long as the rest of the teams keep pulling down the Aments, Wisnauskas, and Myers level players.

Michigan isn't getting those players yet. If and when they do, ANY D1 caliber coach, including Conry, will get them more BigTen w's. This is a simple game. Maryland isn't blowing teams out because of coaching. They're blowing teams out because they have the best players at pretty much every position on the field, no matter who they play. Give Conry that roster, and he's heading to the Final Four....same goes for every D1 coach.

And I am not talking about whether the coach develops an AA. I am talking about finishing higher than LAST PLACE in conference since the conference existed. And at a place with the best facilities in the conference. (Caveat for OSU because I understand they are getting new facilities and do not know if they will surpass Michigan’s).

Clearly elite recruits care about things other than facilities.

We will have to disagree re coaching. I’ve seen great coaches take purportedly less talented teams to championships way too often to think the coach might not be the most important piece to the puzzle.

Tillman has taken solid recruits and made them keys to success. He would not be where he is without having made good recruits into excellent players and without creating a culture that expects to win. There are very few kids in any class who are “elite” and above their peers.

What do “elite” recruits care about? If it is just lacrosse, then maybe they just go with what’s been successful recently. If they are thinking beyond the next four years, then lots of factors at play.

Academics? Michigan is the top school in the Big 10, save perhaps Hopkins which is a totally different college experience. The difference between a Michigan and a Maryland degree is a chasm. Same re Rutgers and Penn State. God bless Ohio State on this criteria.

A job? Michigan has the biggest alumni network in the world.

Fun? Would you rather be in Ann Arbor during football season in the fall than in Baltimore, New Jersey, or College Park—please don’t say no.

The Coach? That’s tough competition in the Big 10.

Facilities, by the way, provide the means to improve—Michigan’s lacrosse team has its own dedicated weight facility, including rehab/recovery equipment that most ACC football teams would die for. Put an experienced D1 lacrosse coach there and they finish other than last place in the league.

Clear enough?

CP isn’t the nicest town but it’s an easy train ride into DC so it’s a bajillion times better than Ann Arbor on the fun count. I lived in DC for a few years and know Ann Arbor, I’d take fall in DC 100/100x.

People wildly overrated large university in college town experiences see on a few home football games. It’s like saying “I like NYC! Love Ellis Island, Times Square and Little Italy!” Columbus is a little bigger and ok but still folks are wildly overrating the college town thing and I went to a bucolic little NE school for undergrad that sits on a lake but have also lived in DC, Manhattan (not a outer boroughs) and Atlanta (ITP rather than OTp for anyone who’s familiar).

Now New Brunswick is neither an easy trip or realistic for a college kid to NYC or a nice enough town. Sure. But even Hop to Inner Harbor is a better experience than Ann Arbor for all but 5-6 weekends a year.

Not to mention that if you’re actually cool and social you can find fun anywhere so that doesn’t matter all that much.

Job-lacrosse has its own network. There’s guys from the 80s at Bart who find plenty of good street gigs (lot of sales and reading vs Corp fun or M&A but that’s fine for the personalities usually, anecdotally often exceeding their Peter Principle ceiling). I love that place but it’s not an elite academic feeder into goldman exactly yet there’s plenty of guys like the vice chairman for fin svcs at Barclays who hook kids up every year and you’re only talking about 5-15 graduating kids per year so the job thing is also fairly overrated since you’re more likely to employ your lacrosse than general career services for that. And it’s undergrad in a world where a masters is the new bachelors and been that way for a decade.

are there coaches that can make a difference? Sure. 2-3 in the entire universe of D1 in any given year and it’s more as general manager of the program than making individual players better. Top tier who can really move the needle is probably 5-10% at best fo the schools who actually have a chance at the title in a given year which realistically only includes parts of three conferences so maybe you have 10% of 20-25 schools or, 2-3. In that case Mich is like everyone else unless they get that one rare egg like a Bill Tierney. For the other 40-50 programs coaching can be much more important and the difference between being in/around the playoffs, getting national attention for your institution and adding actual economic and social value for your school but if you’re playing in that sandbox odds of making a meaningful change are incredibly low. So it kind of goes back to “who”s your replacement?” If you don’t have a clear cut improvement signed and sealed before you fire your guy you’re probably not doing a good job as AD.

[gymman1031]

I can only ask that you carefully read what I post and resist going bonkers with wild hyperbole and obtuse extrapolations.

And I ask that you don't contradict yourself, making it difficult to understand your points. Fair?

Recruiting is not a discriminator among coaches for a place like Michigan, in my opinion. Whoever coaches there will get really strong players coming out of high school. Paul had classes “ranked” in the top ten from time to time. Conry inherited those players and recruited other highly ranked players. Some end up flaming out—like at other schools. The bottom line is that the coach owns the results.

Agree. But Michigan has been unable to land a single elite recruit. And to be clear, I don't mean what IL thinks is an elite recruit when they are in High School..I mean an actual, real life, elite D1 player. Until they start pulling them down, no amount of coaching will get Michigan out of the BigTen bottom half, so long as the rest of the teams keep pulling down the Aments, Wisnauskas, and Myers level players.

Michigan isn't getting those players yet. If and when they do, ANY D1 caliber coach, including Conry, will get them more BigTen w's. This is a simple game. Maryland isn't blowing teams out because of coaching. They're blowing teams out because they have the best players at pretty much every position on the field, no matter who they play. Give Conry that roster, and he's heading to the Final Four....same goes for every D1 coach.

And I am not talking about whether the coach develops an AA. I am talking about finishing higher than LAST PLACE in conference since the conference existed. And at a place with the best facilities in the conference. (Caveat for OSU because I understand they are getting new facilities and do not know if they will surpass Michigan’s).

Clearly elite recruits care about things other than facilities.

We will have to disagree re coaching. I’ve seen great coaches take purportedly less talented teams to championships way too often to think the coach might not be the most important piece to the puzzle.

Tillman has taken solid recruits and made them keys to success. He would not be where he is without having made good recruits into excellent players and without creating a culture that expects to win. There are very few kids in any class who are “elite” and above their peers.

What do “elite” recruits care about? If it is just lacrosse, then maybe they just go with what’s been successful recently. If they are thinking beyond the next four years, then lots of factors at play.

Academics? Michigan is the top school in the Big 10, save perhaps Hopkins which is a totally different college experience. The difference between a Michigan and a Maryland degree is a chasm. Same re Rutgers and Penn State. God bless Ohio State on this criteria.

A job? Michigan has the biggest alumni network in the world.

Fun? Would you rather be in Ann Arbor during football season in the fall than in Baltimore, New Jersey, or College Park—please don’t say no.

The Coach? That’s tough competition in the Big 10.

Facilities, by the way, provide the means to improve—Michigan’s lacrosse team has its own dedicated weight facility, including rehab/recovery equipment that most ACC football teams would die for. Put an experienced D1 lacrosse coach there and they finish other than last place in the league.

Clear enough?

CP isn’t the nicest town but it’s an easy train ride into DC so it’s a bajillion times better than Ann Arbor on the run count. I lived in DC for a few years and know Ann Arbor, I’d take fall in DC 100/100x.

I don't know. The campus and the life on and near campus are huge, too. Maryland is far from one of the best in DI Lax when it comes to those. When you go way off campus, you can have fun, but it still doesn't give you the same college mentality and experience. And yes, having a football team that wins and creates a fun gameday atmosphere is huge for recruiting for other sports.

[Farfromgeneva]

Your making opinion statement that you think for yourself to be fact for every high school kid. P

It’s a half dozen games/weekends a year. My FIL is now a top 50 donor at Ga Tech. I sit in the beat seats in the house, granted Tech blows at football and the school lacks hotties because it’s STEM focused but it’s overrated.

I guess you don’t get real college experiences at UCLA, NYU, Columbia or any other college in a city then.

We’ve all been to OSU, PsU or other massive football venues for major game say some point. Can argue a tastes and preference string for yourself personally but to apply it sort large to high school kids is silly. Ive experienced all of the things you suggest and it’s fun, but they’re usually open off experiences. They don’t bind things. And massive institutions are cool if you want to get lost in the crowd but also not for everyone.

MDs campus is fine. The area nearby a little sketchy but ha sgentrified greatly since I lived in DC first half of the 2000s. Have you ever been on the UMD campus?

Winter in the NE sucks. Why do you think there’s mass migration from the NE to the SE and SW for two plus decades? It’s not the culture warriors winning I assure you it’s the weather, low costs related to lack of infrastructure expenditures (which will catch up over time).

[gymman1031]

Your making opinion statement that you think for yourself to be fact for every high school kid. P

It’s a half dozen games/weekends a year. My FIL is now a top 50 donor at Ga Tech. I sit in the beat seats in the house, granted Tech blows at football and the school lacks hotties because it’s STEM focused but it’s overrated.

I guess you don’t get real college experiences at UCLA, NYU, Columbia or any other college in a city then.

We’ve all been to OSU, PsU or other massive football venues for major game say some point. Can argue a tastes and preference string for yourself personally but to apply it sort large to high school kids is silly. Ive experienced all of the things you suggest and it’s fun, but they’re usually open off experiences. They don’t bind things. And massive institutions are cool if you want to get lost in the crowd but also not for everyone.

MDs campus is fine. The area nearby a little sketchy but ha sgentrified greatly since I lived in DC first half of the 2000s. Have you ever been on the UMD campus?

Winter in the NE sucks. Why do you think there’s mass migration from the NE to the SE and SW for two plus decades? It’s not the culture warriors winning I assure you it’s the weather, low costs related to lack of infrastructure expenditures (which will catch up over time).

I certainly have been on Maryland's campus. I am not calling it ugly. But MANY, MANY DI programs have nicer campuses. I actually can't call it beautiful in any way.

[gymman1031]

Your making opinion statement that you think for yourself to be fact for every high school kid. P

It’s a half dozen games/weekends a year. My FIL is now a top 50 donor at Ga Tech. I sit in the beat seats in the house, granted Tech blows at football and the school lacks hotties because it’s STEM focused but it’s overrated.

I guess you don’t get real college experiences at UCLA, NYU, Columbia or any other college in a city then.

We’ve all been to OSU, PsU or other massive football venues for major game say some point. Can argue a tastes and preference string for yourself personally but to apply it sort large to high school kids is silly. Ive experienced all of the things you suggest and it’s fun, but they’re usually open off experiences. They don’t bind things. And massive institutions are cool if you want to get lost in the crowd but also not for everyone.

MDs campus is fine. The area nearby a little sketchy but ha sgentrified greatly since I lived in DC first half of the 2000s. Have you ever been on the UMD campus?

Winter in the NE sucks. Why do you think there’s mass migration from the NE to the SE and SW for two plus decades? It’s not the culture warriors winning I assure you it’s the weather, low costs related to lack of infrastructure expenditures (which will catch up over time).

I certainly have been on Maryland's campus. I am not calling it ugly. But MANY, MANY DI programs have nicer campuses. I actually can't call it beautiful in any way. Personally, I actually think that John Tillman is OVERACHIEVING in recruiting at Maryland. For all that they have in their favor, they have multiple things working against them, too.

[Farfromgeneva]

It’s just a much more dynamic model or calculus than you present it as to why any single kid, let alone a cohort, goes anywhere. It’s super reductive and clearly wrong since it hasn’t worked in a decade. The schools should be fine on their own like a self driving car and it shouldn’t matter if I were the Mich head coach (btw I’d kill it as a HC as long as I had a tremendously strong compliance dept and university legal staff to protect me-could get kids to gravitate to my program all day just don’t ask questions, parents or police) the way you present it. As if Paul and Conroy are literally dilutive you the program. That’s what you are saying. They made things worse from a bad condition of “having no head coach would be more successful” which is your baseline given this argument you make.

This whole argument that Michigan should be doing better is like saying if you bang on your tv with your fist it’ll start working. Simplistic and been proven wrong for a decade because people on LP were calling for Paul’s head before year 3. He was never given a chance.

[gymman1031]

It’s just a much more dynamic model or calculus than you present it as to why any single kid, let alone a cohort, goes anywhere. It’s super reductive and clearly wrong since it hasn’t worked in a decade. The schools should be fine on their own like a self driving car and it shouldn’t matter if I were he Mich head coach the way you present it. As if Paul and Conroy are literally dilutive you the program. That’s what you are saying. They made things worse from a bad condition of “having no head coach would be more successful” which is your baseline given this argument you make.

Um, regardless of what a program has to offer, coaches recruiting efforts and abilities factor HUGE in the talent they get. Many times in the history of College Athletics, programs that had lots of offer have had coaches who weren't good at recruiting. Hence, they underachieved in that big-time.

[Farfromgeneva]

Again you cherry pick from my quote but ignore the concept of dynamic model and place 100% of the value on 2-3 variables or just the coach. Put all the prices together and you can’t guarantee any bette results. Just pure speculation. But we know coaches can be dilutive so what if they replaced Conroy with someone that turned out to be the next Dirrigl or Kerwick? Making a change comes with a cost. They’ve got soemthing ok now. The AD at Mich likely pays no more than 300 minutes of attention to lacrosse in a given academic year. Everyone is speculating but without any evidence of high level success no one can prove or make any unarguable case that Michigan should or deserves better than what they have now.

Dynamic model: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_decision-making

[gymman1031]

Again you cherry pick from my quote but ignore the concept of dynamic model and place 100% of the value on 2-3 variables or just the coach. Put all the prices together and you can’t guarantee any bette results. Just pure speculation. But we know coaches can be dilutive so what if they replaced Conroy with someone that turned out to be the next Dirrigl or Kerwick? Making a change comes with a cost. They’ve got soemthing ok now. The AD at Mich likely pays no more than 300 minutes of attention to lacrosse in a given academic year. Everyone is speculating but without any evidence of high level success no one can prove or make any unarguable case that Michigan should or deserves better than what they have now.

Dynamic model: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_decision-making

It is pretty simple:

-Michigan has a ton to offer in recruiting. In fact, more than a large majority of other DI programs.
-Due to that and Coach Conry's hard work in recruiting, they are doing very well in that.
-As I have said, yes, he is getting fine talent.
-Yes, just like last year, they were very young this year.
-Next year, the young team excuses will be much less valid.
-He definitely needs to get to ten wins in a season and a top four conference finish soon.

[Young Warrior]

Again you cherry pick from my quote but ignore the concept of dynamic model and place 100% of the value on 2-3 variables or just the coach. Put all the prices together and you can’t guarantee any bette results. Just pure speculation. But we know coaches can be dilutive so what if they replaced Conroy with someone that turned out to be the next Dirrigl or Kerwick? Making a change comes with a cost. They’ve got soemthing ok now. The AD at Mich likely pays no more than 300 minutes of attention to lacrosse in a given academic year. Everyone is speculating but without any evidence of high level success no one can prove or make any unarguable case that Michigan should or deserves better than what they have now.

Dynamic model: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_decision-making

It is pretty simple:

-Michigan has a ton to offer in recruiting. In fact, more than a large majority of other DI programs.
-Due to that and Coach Conry's hard work in recruiting, they are doing very well in that.
-As I have said, yes, he is getting fine talent.
-Yes, just like last year, they were very young this year.
-Next year, the young team excuses will be much less valid.
-He definitely needs to get to ten wins in a season and a top four conference finish soon.

The reality is that the difference between a lot of these kids /programs isnt actually that great, especially as they get older. Is Michigan getting better kids than RIchmond/Jax etc? I dont know....but at some point this is about developing what you have and running a scheme that fits their skills.
THAT is on a coach. Yes, you probably need an O'Neill or Shellenberger - type player to win a natty.....but you dont to make a conference final or just get an NCAA bid.
I think Conry's contract is up now so all of the questions about his future will be answered soon...and likely put to bed for a while as I doubt their are many schools, even ones with money like Michigan, that have a huge tolerance to pay multiple years of a buyout if its not working.

[gymman1031]

Again you cherry pick from my quote but ignore the concept of dynamic model and place 100% of the value on 2-3 variables or just the coach. Put all the prices together and you can’t guarantee any bette results. Just pure speculation. But we know coaches can be dilutive so what if they replaced Conroy with someone that turned out to be the next Dirrigl or Kerwick? Making a change comes with a cost. They’ve got soemthing ok now. The AD at Mich likely pays no more than 300 minutes of attention to lacrosse in a given academic year. Everyone is speculating but without any evidence of high level success no one can prove or make any unarguable case that Michigan should or deserves better than what they have now.

Dynamic model: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_decision-making

It is pretty simple:

-Michigan has a ton to offer in recruiting. In fact, more than a large majority of other DI programs.
-Due to that and Coach Conry's hard work in recruiting, they are doing very well in that.
-As I have said, yes, he is getting fine talent.
-Yes, just like last year, they were very young this year.
-Next year, the young team excuses will be much less valid.
-He definitely needs to get to ten wins in a season and a top four conference finish soon.

The reality is that the difference between a lot of these kids /programs isnt actually that great, especially as they get older. Is Michigan getting better kids than RIchmond/Jax etc? I dont know....but at some point this is about developing what you have and running a scheme that fits their skills.
THAT is on a coach. Yes, you probably need an O'Neill or Shellenberger - type player to win a natty.....but you dont to make a conference final or just get an NCAA bid.
I think Conry's contract is up now so all of the questions about his future will be answered soon...and likely put to bed for a while as I doubt their are many schools, even ones with money like Michigan, that have a huge tolerance to pay multiple years of a buyout if its not working.

I totally agree. As critical as I am of Michigan and Conry, he deserves at least a little more time. However, if, next year, with a much more experienced team, there is no, or very little, signs of improvement, well.....

[Farfromgeneva]

Does Mich have anyone on the level of the best player at UMD or Rutgers? Including Zawada? Because those are the teams in the conference final. How about as good as Jack Myers? Those are the teams in or who has a real shot at the conference finals this year.

How do you get a NCAA bid in the Big Ten? Be in the top three so you hve to have a Wisnauskas, Myers level player yo get an NCAA bid while sitting inside of the conference. Unless you beat the top ACC, IL and PL teams. Look who’s fighting for an NCAA bid. That’s schedule was a huge problem this year. You can’t talk playoffs and have that kind of OOC.

[gymman1031]

Does Mich have anyone on the level of the best player at UMD or Rutgers? Including Zawada? Because those are the teams in the conference final. How about as good as Jack Myers? Those are the teams in or who has a real shot at the conference finals this year.

How do you get a NCAA bid in the Big Ten? Be in the top three so you hve to have a Wisnauskas, Myers level player yo get an NCAA bid while sitting inside of the conference. Unless you beat the top ACC, IL and PL teams. Look who’s fighting for an NCAA bid. That’s schedule was a huge problem this year. You can’t talk playoffs and have that kind of OOC.

Yes, their OOC was weak. And they were ill-prepared for the conference part of their schedule. No, Michigan may well not have a player like some that Maryland and Rutgers do. However, could it be because the head coaches of those program are much better when it comes to being head coaches? Including when it comes to developing and making the most out of the talent? I am not saying that is definitely the reason. But it is very fair to say that it could be.

[Farfromgeneva]

Does Mich have anyone on the level of the best player at UMD or Rutgers? Including Zawada? Because those are the teams in the conference final. How about as good as Jack Myers? Those are the teams in or who has a real shot at the conference finals this year.

How do you get a NCAA bid in the Big Ten? Be in the top three so you hve to have a Wisnauskas, Myers level player yo get an NCAA bid while sitting inside of the conference. Unless you beat the top ACC, IL and PL teams. Look who’s fighting for an NCAA bid. That’s schedule was a huge problem this year. You can’t talk playoffs and have that kind of OOC.

Yes, their OOC was weak. And they were ill-prepared for the conference part of their schedule. No, Michigan may well not have a player like some that Maryland and Rutgers do. However, could it be because the head coaches of those program are much better when it comes to being head coaches? Including when it comes to developing and making the most out of the talent? I am not saying that is definitely the reason. But it is very fair to say that it could be.

Still not a reason to fire a person and start over, which is what happens with a new coach except in rare circumstances (UND moving from Cottle and UNC moving from Haus, but look at transition from Urick, transition from Dom at UVA was a little faster but had a rebuild, etc).

This is all okay and make believe stuff but not the real world. It’s fantasy sports applied to a non revenue still very niche sport.

Are we asking if Tillman or Brecht are better than Conroy? Probably I’d presume, Brecht has two playoff appearances in 15yrs through Siena. Took him how many years to get in and win a playoff game at Rutgers? Including some pre Big Ten years. I believe Brecht got suspended at one point for abusing a player or something as well. At Rutgers. Is that ok at Mich who’s trying to settle years of child abuse issues? Can they hire any coach who can do whatever? Outside football? Juwan Howard nearly lost his job for his behavior and that’s BB.

And it seems your position is that Myers made Myers better at OSU or that Tillman made Wisnauskas better. So if you can’t turn your best player into a 1st team AA tewey candidate then your a failure as HC?

This coaching thing gets stupid after a while. You’ve been making the claim that they should’ve been in a final four years ago and now are doubling down on how it’s someone’s fault that you’ve been wrong. These guys, some are jerks and not great people, some mediocre professionals and some morons, but they work hard and spend years making like $50k-$75k/yr for a shot at 1/70 or so jobs in the entire country and then folks want to bounce people within 2-3yrs of them arriving in a insignificant sport to most of the country. Consistent for acolytes and super fans but unrealistic in the larger world.