I will preface this with I think Cohen was a good hire and have never advocated for his firing and am very pleased with our direction. That being said his tenure at Kentucky was fairly average and he left them in position to go 12-18 in SEC play, not making it back to Hoover until last season.
Could this also be a compliment to Cohen's coaching ability? Who's to say that if Cohen had stayed, Kentucky wouldn't have won the SEC again? It can be looked at in multiple ways, not just negatively.
The mythological Cohen Kentucky story is overblown, he's had better success at MSU not even counting a high ranking this year. He won the SEC in 2006 based upon nothing more than the ballpark in which they played. In league play they hit 58 HR compared to 22 for opponents (opponents batting average was .20 higher than theirs) With a 13-2 Home league record it didn't matter that they went 7-8 on the road. This is fun and all for the fans, just like those Sacramento Kings fans enjoyed all their regular season wins they used to pile up. A program that fails to make Hoover for 3 seasons after you leave was not 'built' on any solid foundation.
I agree that Kentucky was not as good as their record indicated that year, BUT half of the battle with making it to Omaha is getting into the Regionals and having a good seed and good matchups. He accomplished that...and at Kentucky, just finding a way to get into the dance was successful. He didn't have a history to compete with like he does at MSU.
The problem with that approach is that this game is results based on the postseason exclusively. The regular season is important as it is the basis for the postseason but once you are there you have to be able to play postseason ball which means Pitching, defense, and scoring runs are a necessity. A well rounded hitting team can compete, but when you live with a gimmicky offense, you also die by it. Managing only 4 hits they lost their opening regional game to Ball State, eventually bowing out to CoC. Same story in his regional 2 years later (after winning the SEC he missed a regional the following year.) In the postseason you have to hit the ball to win.
Once again, I agree with this...BUT part of the battle to making it to Omaha is getting a great seed and good matchups. I see no problem in playing the game to fit your home park if you play a majority of your games there. As much as you like to trash the small ball, and a lot of times rightfully so, you can't guarantee that if Cohen tried to coach a power hitting club that we would succeed considering the park we play in. So would you rather squeak into the Regionals as a #3 seed with a power and gap hitting club, making the road a tougher one.....or take advantage of your park by playing small ball and pitching well, get a #1 seed, host, and have an easier road to Omaha? I could see arguments either way, because like you said, a better hitting club can win the whole thing....but without small ball and pitching, they may not even make it out of the Regional because they're a lower seed. Plus, by recruiting tons of pitching, we put ourselves in a good situation once we make it to Omaha under Cohen, because the tournament format will not affect our pitching like it will others.
See what I did there? It's a prime example of being able to agree to disagree sometimes...because where you spin the offense to a negative, it can easily be spun into a positive that HELPS us get to Omaha. I honestly feel like having a team with a little less hitting, but incredible pitching, is more capable of winning it all. Why? Because every year the team that wins it all gets hot at the plate...while our hitters aren't Great, they are more than capable of getting hot. But unlike other teams, if our bats get hot, it's over...because our pitching staff will not allow you to outscore us. It's easier to get hot at the plate for a CWS run, then to get hot on the mound for a CWS run, in my opinion.
At MSU we should expect no less than a regional appearance every single year. That is the level that our program should be. Cohen looks to be on the path where this will be an attainable goal every year but once we are there we have to advance and even then advance again. Omaha should be the goal every single year. True: a coach making regionals will not be fired (most cases) but we should expect more than just showing up.
agree 100%
Our 2011 Super team could hit (.30 higher than the 2012 team) We have to hit to be successful in the postseason. Look at 2007 Super, 8 runs 8 runs. You must put up crooked numbers and the best way is to have hitters for average and hitters for power. Rougedawg's post about postseason success was dead on.
Agree to an extent, but if you counter a little bit less hitting with a lot more pitching, I think you can win in the postseason that way too. It's a matter of opinion....does good pitching shut down good hitting? Or does good hitting knock out good pitching?
