|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Feb 2, 2023 12:35:42 GMT -8
Sometimes it’s about trends. J Smith’s is positive. The trend is your friend! W Tinkle’s is all over the place! S Rueck’s is negative. M Canham’s is positive. Tinkle has had 2 horrible years, but aside from that he’s never actually trended downward here. I didn't say it did, did I? |
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Feb 2, 2023 13:57:53 GMT -8
Tinkle has had 2 horrible years, but aside from that he’s never actually trended downward here. I didn't say it did, did I? My apologies, My brain is weird... I was reading this on my phone and the words "is negative" for Rueck's "trend" align up directly below Tinkle's "Is all over the place" and I guess I skipped down a line. As far as Rueck's trend goes, I wouldn't call it negative yet either. The WBB team has at least 9 games left, they won more last year than the previous year and could win more yet this year. I guess I basically have issues with the idea that a team that is winning more than the previous year is on a "downward" trend, especially if it's for more than one year in a row. Personally I don't expect our teams to perform a perfect trend line, there can be just too many variables. I few good years can be followed by a few bad years, my hope is to not see a multi-year downward trend unless there's a lot of fairly obvious reasons beyond just coaching. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Feb 2, 2023 16:37:45 GMT -8
Let's go back to 2014 and play everyone's favorite gameshow, Choose Your Mike!
Mike #1 Mike #2
6–5 3–5 3–8 0–8
3–8 2–6 5–6 2–6
4–7 3–5 8–5 4–4
9–3 5–3 7–5 5–3
5–6 3–5 5–6 3–5
8–4 5–3 10–4 6–3
3–8 2–6 9–4 6–3
5–6 3–5 9–4 7–2
10–2 7–1 8–5 6–3
3–8 0–8 5–7 4–5
3–9 1–7 3–9 3–6
4–7 2–6 9–4 6–3
10–2 6–2 7–6 4–5
10–3 7–1 5–7 2–7
82-78 49-63 93-80 58-63
I was told by the torch and pitchfork crowd in 2014 that Mike #1 was in all ways superior to Mike #2 for reasons that were obvious. It seemed like 19 hucksters out of 20 were sold that the three 10 win seasons by Mike #1 trumped the better conference and non-conference record. Mike #2 was "Mediocre Mike." And Mike #1 was what we wanted and should aspire to.
Now, I am told that the torch in pitchfork crowd was wrong back in 2014. It turns out that we want sustained "mediocre" success. Sustained "mediocre" success is what we want. No booms. No busts. Just sustained above-average "mediocrity."
It boggles my mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Feb 2, 2023 16:50:54 GMT -8
I knew who Mike #2 was just looking at the very familiar numbers. I'd need to do a bit of research to figure out who Mike #1 is.
Edit: Figured it out
|
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Feb 2, 2023 17:01:01 GMT -8
I knew who Mike #2 was just looking at the very familiar numbers. I'd need to do a bit of research to fiure out who Mike #1 is. Two Mikes who took over for Dennis Erickson. Mike Price. I remember a lot of yammering about how we wanted a Mike Price. Mike Riley had more sustained success, but he never had that 10-2 season. Now, we have Tinkle, whose hits and misses remind me a lot of what Price did at Wazzu. You build to a point and then the talent evaporates and you start over again. There's a trend, but it is cyclical, more like a sine curve, than a straight line. Does the fanbase have the stomach for those ups and downs? Dunno. I do. I was happy with Riley before BDC chased off Langs. I am happy with Tinkle. I reserve my right to immediately change my mind at any time, but I am very encouraged by what I have seen in year one of the rebuild. |
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Feb 2, 2023 18:30:32 GMT -8
I didn't say it did, did I? My apologies, My brain is weird... I was reading this on my phone and the words "is negative" for Rueck's "trend" align up directly below Tinkle's "Is all over the place" and I guess I skipped down a line. As far as Rueck's trend goes, I wouldn't call it negative yet either. The WBB team has at least 9 games left, they won more last year than the previous year and could win more yet this year. I guess I basically have issues with the idea that a team that is winning more than the previous year is on a "downward" trend, especially if it's for more than one year in a row. Personally I don't expect our teams to perform a perfect trend line, there can be just too many variables. I few good years can be followed by a few bad years, my hope is to not see a multi-year downward trend unless there's a lot of fairly obvious reasons beyond just coaching. Well, if you don’t see a trend in finishes of 1, 1, 4, 3, 6, 5, 8, and currently 10, I just can’t help you. |
|
