So now that Tad has created expections...

[rolandftw]

Why? He did make it to the tourney twice and went 1-2. No coach since the 60's had made it before him.

Yeah, but most of that was on Billups. With one NCAA bid in the 10 following seasons, no surprise people will generally look down on the Patton years. Might have still been an improvement from past years, and that is likely why he was able to stick around for so long.

 

[Buffnik]

Reality means we're due for the occasional bad year, aka, 17 wins. As much of a fan as I am, I'm also realistic about how difficult it is to win +20 year in and out.

The expectation of making the tourney every year is probably a little too high. 3 out of 4 years (75% of the time), sure. Every year from here to Tad Boyle's infinity (100%), no.

Kentucky (who in their defense sent a bunch of people to the NBA) didn't even make the tourney this year. They brought in a bunch of Top 100 freshmen and they still didn't get it done. Hopkins is a Top 100 freshmen. Do I expect him to play as well as XJ down the stretch? I would be thrilled if he did, but I wouldn't be surprised if he needed a year until he is a star because that's a realistic expectation. Not all Top 100 players are equal.

I like the enthusiasm, but this is just our second year in a row in the tourney. Our trajectory looks good, but it's naive to think the trajectory is always up and to the right.

Certainly. But we're talking about CU. Like with football in the late 1980s through the 1990s, when the Buffs go on a run they go on a mother****ing run. :smile2:

 

[CVilleBuff]

Look at Wisconsin, Pittsburgh, even Notre Dame (i don't get the hate for Brey). I would gladly take any of those, albeit preferably not losing to lower seeds if we start becoming more highly seeded.

 

[Gold]

Certainly. But we're talking about CU. Like with football in the late 1980s through the 1990s, when the Buffs go on a run they go on a mother****ing run. :smile2:

Ok I'm in, sign me up for 25 wins a season!

 

[mattrob]

I expect the Tourney every year now.

These past 3 years have been the building phase of the program.

Sure, things could happen that could put us in the NIT in a random year going forward. But one significant way we differ from CBB royalty is that we're not going to see massive roster turnover in a single year as long as Tad manages his recruiting class balance. It's hard to envision another Tad squad being as young as this year's team was.

I'm setting the bar at Wisconsin. But I do understand the folks thinking more along the lines of Marquette.

Almost exactly what I'm thinking. Everyone has the occasional down year, but with our most talented teams likely in front of us, I think it's fair to expect this team to go on a run of tournament appearances. Success breeds success and there's no reason to believe that recruiting will let us down in the near future either.

 

[Scotch]

Yeah, but most of that was on Billups. With one NCAA bid in the 10 following seasons, no surprise people will generally look down on the Patton years. Might have still been an improvement from past years, and that is likely why he was able to stick around for so long.

It was the Billups show, although Patton did recruit Billups as an assistant under Harrington.

 

[OUBuff]

Kentucky also has a lot of of one and done's, we don't so it's not really a good comparision

Yea, I guess you are right Kentucky fans don't have high expectations at all.

 

[Quattro]

Yea, I guess you are right Kentucky fans don't have high expectations at all.

Not what I was saying

 

[OUBuff]

Not what I was saying

No kidding.

 

[aik]

Amazing what a difference 18 months makes. Coming off the NIT run in 2011 I was believing Tad could be the guy to get us a solid, competitive finish every year and be more like the coach/program that fits option #3. Mostly play in the postseason yearly with 3-4 trips dancing in a decade. Basically what I thought were realistic expectations for Patton and Bzdelik, except with Tad actually living up to them.

Now I'm sold on option #2. Consecutive trips to the NCAAs has me sold. Incredible what the coaching change and AD commitment to a basketball program has done to raise the bar of what should be expected of this team. That being said I hope the exponential increase in attention won't make Tad a victim of his own success if he begins having a couple off years due to higher-ranked recruits playing the one-and-done game.

 

[Medford M.]

Tad is recruiting better talent than CU has ever had. He is a great X's and O's coach. Tad has put CU in a position where we really should expect to finish in the top 4 of the PAC every season. A conference like the Pac should be getting 5 teams in every year. We should expect a tourney 4 of every 5 years IMO.

 

[Quattro]

No kidding.

Do you actually want me to elaborate or are you just gonna be a smartass?

 

[OUBuff]

Do you actually want me to elaborate or are you just gonna be a smartass?

No. you were being argumentative for no real reason other than just you being you. Clearly, CU and UK are different situations. My point is that if a team with the history and tradition of UK can have a hiccup and play NIT ball (although it may be a short visit in the NIT :lol, I think fans of CU can handle it too.

Truthfully, I didn't care much for your original comment... don't know why, I just didn't. :huh:

 

[Jello Bear]

It's not realistic to think we won't have some down years, and with a fairly large conference + the over-emphasis on including mid-majors (IMO) there aren't always going to be slots in the field for .500 teams from power conferences.

Were we a tournament-ready team last year? Yes, winning a game showed we deserved the slot. But without the P12 crown, we would have been one of the best NIT teams.

So yeah, we're going to have some NiT years. Hopefully very, very few.

 

[mattrob]

It's not realistic to think we won't have some down years, and with a fairly large conference + the over-emphasis on including mid-majors (IMO) there aren't always going to be slots in the field for .500 teams from power conferences.

Were we a tournament-ready team last year? Yes, winning a game showed we deserved the slot. But without the P12 crown, we would have been one of the best NIT teams.

So yeah, we're going to have some NiT years. Hopefully very, very few.

The way I look at it, my expectation going into each individual season will be a tournament appearance. On a macro level, there's a pretty good shot we'll miss the tourney somewhere in there, but I really think it's reasonable to raise our expectations for the foreseeable future.

 

[CarolinaBuff]

I just think option 1 is getting ahead of ourselves given where this program has come from. Even some of the perennial basketball powerhouses have their off years where they miss the tournament every once in a while. I'm thrilled to have this team in the tournament with an outside chance to make a deep run, which can happen any time you get in. I remember Missouri getting to the Elite 8 one year as something like a 12-seed. Hell, even last year it's amazing if you think about it how close we were to making a run to the Elite 8 - we're tied with Baylor with about 5 minutes left and then our Sweet 16 game would've been against Xavier.

 

[BuffHerd]

The fact that Tad has developed the program to a point, in just three years, that we have a redshirt program is most impressive to me. He can RS a recruit or two each year, that is going to provide stability down the road that we haven't had here.

He is a great game day coach. Our greatest concern should be the ability to keep him long term.

If Tad continue to recruit as he has, we will be competitve year after year in pac12. I suspect Zona and fUCLA will continue to grab recruiting headlines, but I am not convinced getting the Shabaz Muhammads (one and done) of each cycle is the way to build a program (kentucky would disagree most years).

Twenty win seasons and post-season games should be our standard with Tad.

 

[BinaryBuff]

The fact that Tad has developed the program to a point, in just three years, that we have a redshirt program is most impressive to me. He can RS a recruit or two each year, that is going to provide stability down the road that we haven't had here.

He is a great game day coach. Our greatest concern should be the ability to keep him long term.

If Tad continue to recruit as he has, we will be competitve year after year in pac12. I suspect Zona and fUCLA will continue to grab recruiting headlines, but I am not convinced getting the Shabaz Muhammads (one and done) of each cycle is the way to build a program (kentucky would disagree most years).

Twenty win seasons and post-season games should be our standard with Tad.

I would like to think that if Tad is stolen away that CU will be considered a highly desirable job and that we'd get coach of at least equal quality. There's a lot going for CU right now. We've had recent success, we have a nice practice facility, we're hitting 10k fans every night, a good roster of talented players, ability to pay a competitive salary, good conference, great place to live, etc.

 

[cubuffs85]

I would like to think that if Tad is stolen away that CU will be considered a highly desirable job and that we'd get coach of at least equal quality. There's a lot going for CU right now. We've had recent success, we have a nice practice facility, we're hitting 10k fans every night, a good roster of talented players, ability to pay a competitive salary, good conference, great place to live, etc.

Unlike football, it's a much more appealing job than when Tad replaced Bzdelik and even moreso than Patton.

 

[mattrob]

I just think option 1 is getting ahead of ourselves given where this program has come from. Even some of the perennial basketball powerhouses have their off years where they miss the tournament every once in a while. I'm thrilled to have this team in the tournament with an outside chance to make a deep run, which can happen any time you get in. I remember Missouri getting to the Elite 8 one year as something like a 12-seed. Hell, even last year it's amazing if you think about it how close we were to making a run to the Elite 8 - we're tied with Baylor with about 5 minutes left and then our Sweet 16 game would've been against Xavier.

I think we all understand there will be a time when the team does not meet expectations due to injury, chemistry or poor performance, but I think it's fair to expect a tournament appearance every year. The last two recruiting classes are in or near the top 25 and next year looks to be just as good., if not potentially better. That's tournament quality talent.

Kentucky is the example of a big-name program missing the tourney being used in this thread, but I can tell you with certainty that their fan base expected to be in the tournament this year. They fell short, and that happens. But they'll be expected to be back again next year.

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

My "expections" for football are just about at an all-time low. Bball is the complete opposite.

I see Tad building quality depth -- not thru "hello ... see ya" one year wonders -- but with high quality players who can be expected to play in the Black-n-Gold for 2or more years. That means, at any given time, there should be 8 or more fully capable players who can contribute and produce. Using Tad's formula, even an injury to a key player can be minimized.

I may be the ultra-minority here, but I now expect a tourney berth every year, and an "off" year with an NIT bid would be disappointing.

 

[Buffnik]

My "expections" for football are just about at an all-time low. Bball is the complete opposite.

I see Tad building quality depth -- not thru "hello ... see ya" one year wonders -- but with high quality players who can be expected to play in the Black-n-Gold for 2or more years. That means, at any given time, there should be 8 or more fully capable players who can contribute and produce. Using Tad's formula, even an injury to a key player can be minimized.

I may be the ultra-minority here, but I now expect a tourney berth every year, and an "off" year with an NIT bid would be disappointing.

There are 2 things that could happen that would cause it and wouldn't result in me having much upsetness:

1. Unexpected late defections. For instance, we may have a year where not only a guy like Dre leaves early as expected, but 1 or 2 guys who had no business entering the draft decide to leave early. Or we could have transfers of guys who don't like being in the 6th or 7th man role - or even a starter who wants to be closer to home or be the "star" of a lesser team.

2. The dreaded "Double I" - injuries and ineligibility. Athletes sometimes get hurt. Athletes sometimes fail as students. At some point, we'll get bitten by both.

But if we're at full strength, I expect Tad to have us in the Dance.

 

[SECOBuffsFan]

I picked number 1 option because I truly believe in Boyle and his ability to get the kind of recruits in he needs to run his system. Also, with his system having a foundation of defense and rebounding, he will always have competitive teams because of hard work and fundamentals.

 

[jwhite17]

We haven't finished above 5th place in conference yet, so I believe option 2 is our best bet. We aren't a basketball school at all, or even close to the UCLA/Arizona level. We will need to win conference championships/deep tourny runs for 15-20 years to get to that level.

We can fall in the next tier though: Oregon/Washingtons/Cals/etc. Those schools are the biggest competition for us.

We have a long way to go to get there (if ever!). I think Boyle can take us to the tourney 4 out of 5 years, which is awesome for a program like ours. That's reasonable and would build us toward the future with deep tourney runs.

I like how he is recruiting 2 to 5 year guys because that means we will always have upperclassmen balanced with young talented players (this year being the exception), and those two ingredients are successful during tourney play mixing junior/senior leadership and talented youth that wants their minutes.

I doubt Boyle will turn down 1 and done type of player, but his system is better suited for the guys that are "projects." Guys that need a few years in college before they can play in the NBA/overseas. Boyle is great at spotting talent and developing it into draft picks (Dinwiddie/Roberson are both 3 star guys that will definitely get drafted).

This is definitley the most exciting time ever for the bball program.

 

[BuffTE41]

Next year I expect a top-3 finish in the Pac-12 and around 24-25 wins going into the conference tournament. After that I expect to go to the Elite-8. Anything less and I will be disappointed.

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

I get what you're saying, Nik, and I thought about some of those scenarios before I made my comments. A lot of things can happen.

I think we've all watched TB meld the incoming frosh (and a transfer) into the system the last 3 years. It's really been neat to follow how this guy gets players to integrate and produce.

It's been a long drought from success in more than one sport. I'm becoming spoiled with the bball teams results -- I'm really liking the fact that at the beginning of the season, I know the team will be playing in the post-season.

Damnit Tad, see what you've done to me!

 

[Quattro]

We haven't finished above 5th place in conference yet, so I believe option 2 is our best bet. We aren't a basketball school at all, or even close to the UCLA/Arizona level. We will need to win conference championships/deep tourny runs for 15-20 years to get to that level.

Year 1: Had to replace 75% of our scoring from 2010-2011
Year 2: Very young team
Year 3: Return everyone but Dre, Chen, and SHT and gain Jenkins, Gordon, Hopkins, Fletcher, and Thomas

We have a very good chance to win the conference next year or at the least finish top 3. The first three years, as Nik said, were building. We don't need to be on Arizona or UCLA's level (in terms of being a basketball school and tradition) to compete for the top spot in the PAC 12 now and in the future under Boyle, although it will be interesting to see who UCLA hires but Tad Boyle>Sean Miller.

 

[Medford M.]

Year 1: Had to replace 75% of our scoring from 2010-2011
Year 2: Very young team
Year 3: Return everyone but Dre, Chen, and SHT and gain Jenkins, Gordon, Hopkins, Fletcher, and Thomas

We have a very good chance to win the conference next year or at the least finish top 3. The first three years, as Nik said, were building. We don't need to be on Arizona or UCLA's level (in terms of being a basketball school and tradition) to compete for the top spot in the PAC 12 now and in the future under Boyle, although it will be interesting to see who UCLA hires but Tad Boyle>Sean Miller.

More on your first point. Next year will be the first year that Tad doesn't have to replace several starters and a majority of the scoring, especially if Andre comes back.

 

[Quattro]

More on your first point. Next year will be the first year that Tad doesn't have to replace several starters and a majority of the scoring, especially if Andre comes back.

Really sounds like he isn't

 

[Ruckus]

There are 2 things that could happen that would cause it and wouldn't result in me having much upsetness:

1. Unexpected late defections. For instance, we may have a year where not only a guy like Dre leaves early as expected, but 1 or 2 guys who had no business entering the draft decide to leave early. Or we could have transfers of guys who don't like being in the 6th or 7th man role - or even a starter who wants to be closer to home or be the "star" of a lesser team.

2. The dreaded "Double I" - injuries and ineligibility. Athletes sometimes get hurt. Athletes sometimes fail as students. At some point, we'll get bitten by both.

But if we're at full strength, I expect Tad to have us in the Dance.

I know exactly what you're doing.