So our stated goal as I understand it is to go to the NCAA Tourney and win a Game (advance to 32 - not just win a play-in game) within 5 years. I like the goal. It is Huge and bold. And ATTAINABLE.

So, I am starting this thread to address HOW to REALISTICALLY attain that goal.
Its a HUGE goal, that I think will require a HUGE number of changes to be realistically accomplished and not just HUGE talk.

How hard is this goal??? CAA Northeastern went to NCAA for 2nd time in Coach Bill Coen's 12 years there - has never won an NCAA T game. NO CAA team has won to advance to the 32 in a long time, most of those teams are no longer in the CAA. On a scale of 1-10 (with 10 being win the whole thing) I suppose its a 7.

First, let's look at teams that attained that goal in 2019: went to NCAA and won a game in the round of 64 to advance to round of 32. And a look at some metrics on those programs that might indicate how to get there, other than by dumb luck. I will include W&M in the metrics for comparison along with Northeastern which went to the Tourney but did not advance to 32. I think most of you know all this, or have a sense of it, but it is very telling. And gives us a roadmap of what is necessary to realistically progress towards the goal. GSR & FSR are grad rates from the 2011 cycle most recent available, and are for Mens Basketball. Only 3 D1 teams score 100/100 on GSR/FSR: Lehigh, Bucknell, & W&M. So Dane has good credentials to keep up the good GSR/FSR scores. But that is not the stated goal we are dealing with, and actually may reflect the challenge.

I provide the 2019 32 teams and their GSR/FSR rates and Coach salary (indication of budget, etc.) below, and I will provide solution/plan as well below that. I was tempted to note the Coaches/Programs in the 32 who have been sanctioned or are under review but opted not to, here goes:

2019 NCAA 2nd Rnd of 32 & W&M, Northeastern (neither made 32)
Team GSR/FGR Coach Salary of $1M

W&M 100/100
NorthEastern 83/69 N-461 ?
NCAA Overall 81/

Duke 100/57 Y
UCF 73/40 Y
Liberty 100/50 N-300 as asst before - undisclosed
VaTech 70/38 Y
Maryland 64/25 Y
LSU 89/31 Y
Minn 77/57 Y
MichSt 100/50 Y

Gonzaga 100/40 Y
Baylor 71/33 Y
Murray St 50/9 N-500
Fla St 83/64 Y
Buff 67/64 N - 342
Tex Tech 69/31 Y
Florida 75/40 Y
Mich 100/60 Y

Kentucky 83/17 Y
Wofford 86/46 N- 161
Ohio St 70/43 Y
Houston 75/17 Y
Auburn 64/36 Y
Kansas 100/21 Y
UNC 64/39 Y
Wash 100/60 Y

Tenn 89/42 Y
Iowa 82/62 Y
Villanova 100/45 Y
Purdue 89/67 Y
Oregon 33/21 Y
UC Irvine 64/47 N - 350+
UVA 78/43 Y
Okla 63/25 Y

What is apparent?
1. 27/32 teams paid their Coach at least $1M a year.
So: W&M needs to invest HUGE $ in coaching salaries and all that comes with it.
Many teams who have made that investment did not make it to the 32, but it is the clearest path to success.

2. Graduation Progress/Academics
Even assuming W&M and all other schools are equally challenging academically (some may want to differ) W&M still has a GSR/FSR rate that are outside the norm.
NO team made the 32 with those kind of rates.

SOLUTION/PLAN: Well this is gonna need a lot of work and all of you are welcome to chime in. However, I'll start:

1. Increase Funding to levels consistent with the benchmark for the stated goal. Math don't lie.

2. A. Adapt some admission standards for W&M.
B. Advocate for the NCAA to raise the bar for the NCAA Tourney academically and require a score of 80 for one of either the GSR or FSR, AND require that neither the GSR or FSR could be less than 50. WHAT WOULD THAT DO? Wreck havoc with the NCAA Tourney and its $ machine. And: of the 2019 32 teams only Duke, Mich St., Liberty, Fla. St., Mich, Wash, Iowa, and Purdue qualified. Spots then go to the next best eligible teams (just like the Bowl qualification for football) who would also have to have a winning record of better than .500 on the court.

3. Postseason NCAA Tourney bans need to be expanded for program violations as well to level the playing field.

In my opinion, W&M needs to 1. improve our program by investing in $ to get on the same court as others 2. change the court rules by getting the academics to matter.
Normally, I'd say good luck. But in theory it is college athletics.

I suggest that the closest in this is Wofford or Liberty. I'd suggest that Liberty benefits from being the highest $ invested in its conference, and Wofford benefits from a particular coach and conference slot as well. I'd also suggest that if you want to meet your goal you don't model yourself on the 2/32 teams or 5/32 ($<1M) but should model on the 27/32 as the target. Our goal is not to achieve through luck/dramatic admission changes/conference change. So the path to the goal is hard but clear.

The Goal is HUGE. The steps to get there are likewise imposing. Let's not just talk the talk, let's walk the walk and go climb the mountain. This analysis is free to W&M so they can put any $ saved into the program and start the Bold campaign to level the playing field. Can W&M compete with student athletes? Yes. Dane comes from Bucknell which also had the 100/100 rates. The problem is not with us, its with the NCAA, and the solution lies there as well. But the problem won't solve itself or stay static to get past.

Enjoy your weekend.

Your citation of the GSR/FSR rates, and W&M’s place in comparison to the rest of the NCAA, makes me ill, and reinforces my questioning of the decision to fire Tony Shaver.

Traditionally, W&M has gone it’s own way.

Using your analysis, W&M has two options in order to have Dance success.

First, the NCAA has to increase academic standards for other schools to level the playing field.

Second, W&M has to lower its own academic standards to level the playing field.

Neither is going to happen.

That is why basing men’s hoops decisions based on making the Dance is a fool’s errand.

Good stuff, Odysseus. I have interjected some comments below.

(06-21-2019 06:26 PM)Odysseus Wrote:  On a scale of 1-10 (with 10 being win the whole thing) I suppose its a 7.

If 10 is winning the whole thing then I think getting to the round of 32 is a 3. Look at Gonzaga who has made the Final Four at least twice and played in the championship game once. Look at how hard they have worked and how long it has taken and they still have not gotten to 10. But what they HAVE done is eons above just making the round of 32 (and hence I think that there is a much larger gap there).

(06-21-2019 06:26 PM)Odysseus Wrote:  1. 27/32 teams paid their Coach at least $1M a year.
So: W&M needs to invest HUGE $ in coaching salaries and all that comes with it.
Many teams who have made that investment did not make it to the 32, but it is the clearest path to success.

I think that the reason those coaches make the big bucks is because they are P5, not necessarily because they are good coaches. Yes, the ones who are good coaches will naturally gravitate to the top of the food chain but, as you said, there are many more in that spectrum making that kind of money who have never won any championships. My opinion is that the P5-ness dictates the money more than the skill of the coach, for most coaches. Since W&M is not P5, we will never be able to afford that kind of salary.

(06-21-2019 06:26 PM)Odysseus Wrote:  B. Advocate for the NCAA to raise the bar for the NCAA Tourney academically and require a score of 80 for one of either the GSR or FSR, AND require that neither the GSR or FSR could be less than 50. WHAT WOULD THAT DO? Wreck havoc with the NCAA Tourney and its $ machine.

Unfortunately for your plan, there is no way that the NCAA would ever do ANYTHING that would wreak havoc with its $ machine.

(06-21-2019 06:26 PM)Odysseus Wrote:  I'd also suggest that if you want to meet your goal you don't model yourself on the 2/32 teams or 5/32 ($<1M) but should model on the 27/32 as the target. Our goal is not to achieve through luck/dramatic admission changes/conference change.

We cannot model ourselves on the 27/32 because the differentiating factor in the equation is the conference that we play in. We will never be P5 and so we will never be on a level playing field in football or basketball (or, really, in almost every sport). That ACC/P5 ship sailed in the 1970's when Davis Paschall retired.

(06-21-2019 06:26 PM)Odysseus Wrote:  The problem is not with us, its with the NCAA, and the solution lies there as well.

Very true and, again, that is why it will never change.

This is a fantasy land proposition. Not the goal, which is laudable, but the proposals. In order to get to the dance; we need to upgrade our recruiting across the board. Especially with post players. We need to give those prospects good reasons to come to Wm&Mary. With 2 or 3 if these guys, we can win the conference tourney.

(06-21-2019 09:28 PM)nj alum Wrote:  Your citation of the GSR/FSR rates, and W&M’s place in comparison to the rest of the NCAA, makes me ill, and reinforces my questioning of the decision to fire Tony Shaver.

Traditionally, W&M has gone it’s own way.

Using your analysis, W&M has two options in order to have Dance success.

First, the NCAA has to increase academic standards for other schools to level the playing field.

Second, W&M has to lower its own academic standards to level the playing field.

Neither is going to happen.

That is why basing men’s hoops decisions based on making the Dance is a fool’s errand.

I don't think that's accurate. We've definitely had the talent the past few years to make the dance with our current academic standards. It takes a degree of luck, but it's not like we haven't been close many times before

(06-21-2019 06:26 PM)Odysseus Wrote:  So our stated goal as I understand it is to go to the NCAA Tourney and win a Game (advance to 32 - not just win a play-in game) within 5 years. I like the goal. It is Huge and bold. And ATTAINABLE.

So, I am starting this thread to address HOW to REALISTICALLY attain that goal.
Its a HUGE goal, that I think will require a HUGE number of changes to be realistically accomplished and not just HUGE talk.

How hard is this goal??? CAA Northeastern went to NCAA for 2nd time in Coach Bill Coen's 12 years there - has never won an NCAA T game. NO CAA team has won to advance to the 32 in a long time, most of those teams are no longer in the CAA. On a scale of 1-10 (with 10 being win the whole thing) I suppose its a 7.

First, let's look at teams that attained that goal in 2019: went to NCAA and won a game in the round of 64 to advance to round of 32. And a look at some metrics on those programs that might indicate how to get there, other than by dumb luck. I will include W&M in the metrics for comparison along with Northeastern which went to the Tourney but did not advance to 32. I think most of you know all this, or have a sense of it, but it is very telling. And gives us a roadmap of what is necessary to realistically progress towards the goal. GSR & FSR are grad rates from the 2011 cycle most recent available, and are for Mens Basketball. Only 3 D1 teams score 100/100 on GSR/FSR: Lehigh, Bucknell, & W&M. So Dane has good credentials to keep up the good GSR/FSR scores. But that is not the stated goal we are dealing with, and actually may reflect the challenge.

I provide the 2019 32 teams and their GSR/FSR rates and Coach salary (indication of budget, etc.) below, and I will provide solution/plan as well below that. I was tempted to note the Coaches/Programs in the 32 who have been sanctioned or are under review but opted not to, here goes:

2019 NCAA 2nd Rnd of 32 & W&M, Northeastern (neither made 32)
Team GSR/FGR Coach Salary of $1M

W&M 100/100
NorthEastern 83/69 N-461 ?
NCAA Overall 81/

Duke 100/57 Y
UCF 73/40 Y
Liberty 100/50 N-300 as asst before - undisclosed
VaTech 70/38 Y
Maryland 64/25 Y
LSU 89/31 Y
Minn 77/57 Y
MichSt 100/50 Y

Gonzaga 100/40 Y
Baylor 71/33 Y
Murray St 50/9 N-500
Fla St 83/64 Y
Buff 67/64 N - 342
Tex Tech 69/31 Y
Florida 75/40 Y
Mich 100/60 Y

Kentucky 83/17 Y
Wofford 86/46 N- 161
Ohio St 70/43 Y
Houston 75/17 Y
Auburn 64/36 Y
Kansas 100/21 Y
UNC 64/39 Y
Wash 100/60 Y

Tenn 89/42 Y
Iowa 82/62 Y
Villanova 100/45 Y
Purdue 89/67 Y
Oregon 33/21 Y
UC Irvine 64/47 N - 350+
UVA 78/43 Y
Okla 63/25 Y

What is apparent?
1. 27/32 teams paid their Coach at least $1M a year.
So: W&M needs to invest HUGE $ in coaching salaries and all that comes with it.
Many teams who have made that investment did not make it to the 32, but it is the clearest path to success.

2. Graduation Progress/Academics
Even assuming W&M and all other schools are equally challenging academically (some may want to differ) W&M still has a GSR/FSR rate that are outside the norm.
NO team made the 32 with those kind of rates.

SOLUTION/PLAN: Well this is gonna need a lot of work and all of you are welcome to chime in. However, I'll start:

1. Increase Funding to levels consistent with the benchmark for the stated goal. Math don't lie.

2. A. Adapt some admission standards for W&M.
B. Advocate for the NCAA to raise the bar for the NCAA Tourney academically and require a score of 80 for one of either the GSR or FSR, AND require that neither the GSR or FSR could be less than 50. WHAT WOULD THAT DO? Wreck havoc with the NCAA Tourney and its $ machine. And: of the 2019 32 teams only Duke, Mich St., Liberty, Fla. St., Mich, Wash, Iowa, and Purdue qualified. Spots then go to the next best eligible teams (just like the Bowl qualification for football) who would also have to have a winning record of better than .500 on the court.

3. Postseason NCAA Tourney bans need to be expanded for program violations as well to level the playing field.

In my opinion, W&M needs to 1. improve our program by investing in $ to get on the same court as others 2. change the court rules by getting the academics to matter.
Normally, I'd say good luck. But in theory it is college athletics.

I suggest that the closest in this is Wofford or Liberty. I'd suggest that Liberty benefits from being the highest $ invested in its conference, and Wofford benefits from a particular coach and conference slot as well. I'd also suggest that if you want to meet your goal you don't model yourself on the 2/32 teams or 5/32 ($<1M) but should model on the 27/32 as the target. Our goal is not to achieve through luck/dramatic admission changes/conference change. So the path to the goal is hard but clear.

The Goal is HUGE. The steps to get there are likewise imposing. Let's not just talk the talk, let's walk the walk and go climb the mountain. This analysis is free to W&M so they can put any $ saved into the program and start the Bold campaign to level the playing field. Can W&M compete with student athletes? Yes. Dane comes from Bucknell which also had the 100/100 rates. The problem is not with us, its with the NCAA, and the solution lies there as well. But the problem won't solve itself or stay static to get past.

Enjoy your weekend.

The Rice Commission on college basketball is in violent agreement with your assessment. “...it is the overwhelming assessment of the Commission that the state of men’ college basketball is deeply troubled. The levels of corruption and deception are now at a point that they threaten the very survival of the college game as we know it.”

“Lost in the talk of big money and corruption is colleges’ central mission to provide higher education to students...The Commission believes that the answer to many of college basketball’s problems lies in a renewed commitment to the college degree as the centerpiece of college athletics.”

The Commission goes on to report that the environment surrounding college basketball is a toxic mix of perverse incentives to cheat.”

What remains to be seen is whether the NCAA and its member institutions care. USA Today reported on May 23 that Mark Emmett was paid $3.9M in 2017, three other execs made $1M+, and eight others made $500k. The NCAA paid $165M for outside legal costs over the last five years and spent $400k on lobbying in addition to the costs of its DC govt relations office and staff.

I was skeptical that a commission composed almost exclusively of Power 5/Big East affiliated members would wave a BS flag so large and so aggressively. They did. The disconnect between what the Commission concluded and the lack of mid major advocacy of the findings remains a mystery.

What would at least be entertaining next March would be for some reporter/wag to float what a tournament field reflecting the objective that “the scholarships themselves are valuable” on the heels of what the corrupt tournament selection committee offers on CBS. And then ask for Condoleezza’s comments.

9 of the final 32 teams in the 2019 tournament have had to forfeit games in their program history.
LSU suspended their coach briefly, Pearl, Calipari, and UNC, and so on.

All I am saying is that if the goal is to advance to the final 32 teams in the tourney, then a realistic approach says:
options:
1. pray
2. wish
3. cheat
4. dumb luck
5. level the playing field and bring it up to W&M level instead of lowering W&M to their level
6. catch lightning in a bottle

Our AD says she can evaluate college basketball. I do not doubt her. She needs to evaluate the playing field and start leading the crusade. But that would make her an unpopular choice for P5 conference schools in the future.

Here's another way of looking at NCAA basketball, be careful what you seek:

Naismith Hall of Fame Coaches:

Roy Williams - great academic tutors and real classes at UNC
Jim Boeheim - 102 games vacated since 2005 (year of induction to HOF)
Rick Pitino - too easy
John Calipari - oh my
Larry Brown - games vacated
Lute Olson - tenure resulted in vacated games
Jim Calhoun - UConn left in tatters but keeps glory - violations
Jerry Tarkanian - "Not one major violation" then Lloyd Daniels and probation
Nolan Richardson - great graduation rate
Bill Self - Silvio DeSousa and Billy PReston?

And on the NCAA current enforcement Bobby Cremins, whose GTech team made the list below with Richardson.

Things have changed since this:
Zero percent
Colleges that graduated none of the black male basketball players who entered as freshmen between 1990-91 to 1994-95, based on the NCAA formula that evaluates whether a degree was received within six years:
BYU
Cal State-Long Beach
Cal State-Sacramento
Cleveland State
Eastern Washington
Georgia Tech
Georgia Southern
Jacksonville St.
James Madison
LSU
McNeese State
Morehead State
Oregon State
Samford
SW Missouri State
Texas Tech
Arkansas
Cincinnati
Colorado
Hawaii-Manoa
Idaho
Louisville
Memphis
Minnesota-Twin Cities
UNLV
Nevada-Reno
Oklahoma
Texas-El Paso
Texas-Pan American
Pacific
Toledo
Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Wyoming
Utah State
Virginia Commonwealth
Western Illinois

That is a wow post. Especially the zero graduation rates in the early mid 90's(I'm looking at you JMU). All the more jaw dropping for me since this was my era (93-97).

(07-01-2019 11:41 AM)Odysseus Wrote:  9 of the final 32 teams in the 2019 tournament have had to forfeit games in their program history.
LSU suspended their coach briefly, Pearl, Calipari, and UNC, and so on.

All I am saying is that if the goal is to advance to the final 32 teams in the tourney, then a realistic approach says:
options:
1. pray
2. wish
3. cheat
4. dumb luck
5. level the playing field and bring it up to W&M level instead of lowering W&M to their level
6. catch lightning in a bottle

Our AD says she can evaluate college basketball. I do not doubt her. She needs to evaluate the playing field and start leading the crusade. But that would make her an unpopular choice for P5 conference schools in the future.

I would guess that if pressed, the random ambitious mid-major AD would argue that the risks associated with agitation are too great. The potential for future scheduling snubs and the loss of the privilege of playing an away game at Power 5 schools isn’t worth any potential gain. Their schools need both the revenue and the recruiting edge these games bring.

Meanwhile, the findings of the Rice Commission are evidently being consigned to the dust bin of history. The NCAA announced this week that the Kentucky AD has been selected to lead the Division 1 Men’s Basketball Committee in charge of selecting, seeding, and bracketing schools for the NCAA Tournament. So much for any thoughts that college athletics were going to be tied to college degrees. The optics of this are horrible, but the NCAA literally can’t be shamed.

I can’t help remembering that in the recent town hall, the uniquely unique uniqueness of W&M Athletics that underpins/informs/constrains the strategy and operations of the department was front and center. The smiling response to a question about whether there were other schools like W&M, was essentially, absolutely not. The inference was, I hope, we’re doing it the right way. I also hope the next survey includes a question as to whether the respondents would be willing to risk the Power 5 outings to make some noise about the sham that the NCAA has become. The follow-on question can be whether respondents would increase or decrease donations if The College had the courage to undertake this effort.