Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Samuel S" data-source="post: 129417095" data-attributes="member: 1754664">If he had won 3/4 of&nbsp; all games and 60% of Big 12 games, I'd say he was doing an excellent job and deserving of a substantial rise and extension.If he had won 2/3 of all games and 55% of Big 12 games, I'd say he was doing a good job and deserved a modest raise and&nbsp; an extension with a greater guarantee..If he had won 60% of all&nbsp; games and 45% of Big 12 games, I'd say he deserved an extension at his current salary with maybe 2 years guaranteed.But, he's only winning 55% of his games and 39% of Big 12 games.That resume is not going to get him a sniff from any Power 5 school, even those with weaker programs, and doesn't really warrant what we are paying him now, let alone additional concessions. It's fairly generous not to cut his salary given that he has indisputably&nbsp; failed by a wide margin to meet the stated goal when he was hired of elevating us to compete for titles. Luck paid for an expected performance that we are not even remotely in the ballpark of achieving at this point.&nbsp; That some&nbsp; are now exalting a 5th place finish (at best) shows how far expectations have declined from January of 2012. Sure, the Big 12 is tougher, but even if we win out his Big 12 winning percentage will be a hugely mediocre .444 after 4 years, and we will have never been within fewer than THREE games from first place with a 9 game conference schedule or higher than 5th place.&nbsp;&nbsp; By ISU standards that might be successful. Not by our standards, or at least what they used to be.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Samuel S, post: 129417095, member: 1754664"] If he had won 3/4 of all games and 60% of Big 12 games, I'd say he was doing an [B][U]excellent[/U][/B] job and deserving of a substantial rise and extension. If he had won 2/3 of all games and 55% of Big 12 games, I'd say he was doing a good job and deserved a modest raise and an extension with a greater guarantee.. If he had won 60% of all games and 45% of Big 12 games, I'd say he deserved an extension at his current salary with maybe 2 years guaranteed. But, he's only winning 55% of his games and 39% of Big 12 games. That resume is not going to get him a sniff from any Power 5 school, even those with weaker programs, and doesn't really warrant what we are paying him now, let alone additional concessions. It's fairly generous not to cut his salary given that he has indisputably failed by a wide margin to meet the stated goal when he was hired of elevating us to compete for titles. Luck paid for an expected performance that we are not even remotely in the ballpark of achieving at this point. That some are now exalting a [B]5th place finish[/B] (at best) shows how far expectations have declined from January of 2012. Sure, the Big 12 is tougher, but even if we win out his Big 12 winning percentage will be a hugely mediocre .444 after 4 years, and we will have never been within fewer than THREE games from first place with a 9 game conference schedule or higher than 5th place. By ISU standards that might be successful. Not by our standards, or at least what they used to be. [/QUOTE]

Name