Time for a coaching changeâŚ
Not exactly a good season at 35-20-1.
[QUOTE=EJNiner;174862]Time for a coaching changeâŚ[/QUOTE]
what an uneducated statement
Hibbs has had a glorified high school facility to recruit with for 14 yrs, and competed well this year. Let him get in some top notch recruits with the new stadium before you make statements like that. His guys behave and get great grades and he put 2 guys in MLB, and the team is usually around .500. He has endured 14 seasons in that park, and waited out alot of other upgrades to in the athletic dept to see a new facility finally come his way- to get consistent top players.
facilities bring players, that is the bottom line.
Not exactly. A good season at 35-20-1.
Despite the 2 and barbecue performance of yesterday, this team has alot of potential. The niners only lose one position player (shortstop) and a couple of pitchers. Mcdaid (who had a great season, and agree with Metro, with those numbers the coaches of the A-10 should be ASHAMED of themselves not putting Mcdaid and Mills on the All-Conference team), and Walker who will sign as a free agent and play at the next level. The team as a whole is young and should compete to win the league next year. I donât think with the pieces Hibbs, Durkac, and Hall have in place its time for a coaching change.
[QUOTE=49erJoe;175006]The niners only lose one position player (shortstop) and a couple of pitchers.[/QUOTE]
Steedley will probably not be back. Although, I think Parks can step in in right field. He has a decent bat, but needs to work on his fielding. McDaid is a senior and Mills might get drafted.
How is 35-20-1 not a good season? 63% winning percentage. If you can win over 30 games, youâre a good team. Couple breaks here or there, and youâre at 38 or 40 wins. Itâs not like basketball where your offense or defense predecates your winning ⌠coaching plays much more of a factor in other sports. In baseball, there is only so much you can do in-game to win the ballgames ⌠call for the hit and run, steals, pitching changes, etc. Players just have to perform, and judging by 4 unearned runs ⌠they didnât perform.
Of course, the coach has to bring in players who can produce/perform. But if you donât have the resources, itâs difficult to compete for talent (this is the same discussion we have about Lutz/players). I think Hibbs has done a great job with what he has had to work with. Glad weâre catching up in baseball now.
[QUOTE=Brick Tamland, Weather;175053]How is 35-20-1 not a good season?[/QUOTE]
It is a good season. But we should have done even better than that in the A-10. The A-10 is terrible in baseball! Anything less than the conference championship in this league, with the team we had this year, is a disappointment. I went to close to 25 games this year and we were just too up and down.
Just for the sake of argument, here are Charlotteâs âteamâ sports winning percentages this school year:
Softball: .764
Womenâs Basketball: .714
Baseball: .625
Menâs Basketball: .594
Womenâs Soccer: .550
Volleyball: .515
Menâs Soccer: .444
You can say the A-10 is terrible in baseball, but Rhode Island (the #1) lost to Saint Louis yesterday. So obviously theyâre hot at the right time. We tied Dayton at 18-9 for third place, and they were the second team out of the tournament after us. Itâs all about getting hot at the right time in a tournament atmosphere.
Charlotte was in both games with nationally-ranked Carolina this year (second game got out of hand late in the game). Is 18-9 disappointing in the A-10 ⌠maybe. Look at the scores of those games - out of the nine, Iâd bet you that not more than one of them was by more than one run.
[QUOTE=Brick Tamland, Weather;175060]You can say the A-10 is terrible in baseball, but Rhode Island (the #1) lost to Saint Louis yesterday. So obviously theyâre hot at the right time. We tied Dayton at 18-9 for third place, and they were the second team out of the tournament after us. Itâs all about getting hot at the right time in a tournament atmosphere.
Charlotte was in both games with nationally-ranked Carolina this year (second game got out of hand late in the game). Is 18-9 disappointing in the A-10 ⌠maybe. Look at the scores of those games - out of the nine, Iâd bet you that not more than one of them was by more than one run.[/QUOTE]
Rhode Island isnât any good! I can say the A-10 isnât any good in baseball because itâs true. Itâs a FACT! The A-10 sucks in baseball! With our team that we had this year, we should have won the league. We just didnât bring it every night. I think thatâs more on the players than the coaches. Our relivers really hurt us.
Looking forward to next year with the new stadium. Hopefully Steedley will be back but I doubt it. Hopefully Mills will be back to. Rosenbaum was tough this year. Hopefully he can continue that into next year. Losing Ambrose will hurt. Bray had an unbelievable first half, but really struggled in the second half. OB Taylor is a stud with the glove in left field. Only 3 errors in his last two years. One of them very costly against GW the other day. Heâs a good hitter too and probably the fastest guy on the team. If we can âbring itâ every night, we should win the league next year.
[QUOTE=Brick Tamland, Weather;175053]How is 35-20-1 not a good season? 63% winning percentage. If you can win over 30 games, youâre a good team. Couple breaks here or there, and youâre at 38 or 40 wins. Itâs not like basketball where your offense or defense predecates your winning ⌠coaching plays much more of a factor in other sports. In baseball, there is only so much you can do in-game to win the ballgames ⌠call for the hit and run, steals, pitching changes, etc. Players just have to perform, and judging by 4 unearned runs ⌠they didnât perform.[/QUOTE]
35 wins is not shabby, but against a #230 strength of schedule itâs not terribly impressive. Knowing that we would be in a weaker conference and in a one-bid league, we should have scheduled tougher out of conference than we did. I know we need a few home games, but a #210 non-conference schedule rating is slack on our part. I know we have budgetary restrictions, but there are plenty of teams within a 2-3 hour drive that would help our RPI.
Development of players is the coaches responsibility. I know you canât teach pitchers to throw 90, but you can develop hitters and teach pitchers how to pitch better and develop more pitches. Similar to basketball, you canât make players grow or jump incredibly higher, but you can teach them to shoot better and make them practice their free throws. Itâs tougher than just sending recruited studs out there to do their thing, but thatâs what the coach gets paid for. In a weak baseball league and us the southern-most team, we should have fared better. If we were in the #11 conference or thereabouts, it would be tougher to complain. When youâre in the #21 ranked conference, the results should be better for where we are located with respect to rest of the A-10 schools.
I would point out that everyone here (including yourself) knows that the RPI can be manipulated by a number of factors âŚ
1.) Of our schedule, North Carolina (10, twice), Winthrop (18, but cancelled), Charleston (23, once), Wake Forest (25, three times), Furman (97, twice with one cancelled), Le Moyne (104, three) Virginia Tech (112, twice), were all âqualityâ RPI teams ⌠That is 14 scheduled games out of 29 non-conference possibilities âŚ
1a.) A number of teams underperformed relative to 2005 and hurt our RPI: Indiana (172 in 2005) is just 218 this season. Siena (155 in 2005) is just 208 this season. George Washington won 41 games a year ago but had some injuries early and are just 168th ⌠could have expected that to be higher (were 98th last year).
The only âdogsâ from 2005 on the schedule that we had control over were Appalachian (2) and Cleveland State (3). 7 âdogsâ out of 29 games isnât bad at all.
2.) Trying to predict which teams are going to be good and which are not is an inexact science. N.C. A&T won their league last year, but barely made their tournament this year and just got bounced in Rd. 1. Furman was their league champion in 2005, and Le Moyne was supposed to be their leagueâs champion this year I believe. Game vs. Winthrop (top 25) got rained out ⌠Second Furman game got rained out. Dayton is a top 135 team nearly annually. You hope or expect to see URI (108) in the tournament.
3.) The fact that we played a lot of those A-10 schools that took lumps earlier in the year (driving down their RPI via a lack of wins and plenty of losses). Playing 12 games vs. Temple, Saint Joeâs, La Salle and Duquesne drives the RPI down because they are low RPI teams. We have no choice with them. Fordhamâs RPI wasnât great either.
4.) And still, our RPI was 130 out of 293 as of this posting ⌠meaning we are in the top 44% of teams in the nation despite playing in the 21st ranked league (out of 31).
its hard to come into a new league and dominate it. Especially with a young team with few seniors. True, we had the best talent probably in the A10 and we were the southern most team, but think of the DISADVANTAGE we had going up north in the cold- for the first time. Next year our freshman, soph, and jr will remember the cold and be ready for it. Not making exuceses here, but I think you will see us dominate this league with the new stadium and the players we are able to sign, and you will be able to remove the âunknownsâ of traveling to new conference foes since our guys have had a year to see the A10 venues.
Its hard to just show up and kick someones ass when you have never set foot on their turf. I think 18-9 was not awesome, but pretty admirable- for a young team in the first year of a new conference. Its no different than playing a golf course the first time or shooting hoops in a new gym. The more comfortable you get in your environment, the better you play.
[QUOTE=metro;175115]its hard to come into a new league and dominate it. Especially with a young team with few seniors. True, we had the best talent probably in the A10 and we were the southern most team, but think of the DISADVANTAGE we had going up north in the cold- for the first time. Next year our freshman, soph, and jr will remember the cold and be ready for it. Not making exuceses here, but I think you will see us dominate this league with the new stadium and the players we are able to sign, and you will be able to remove the âunknownsâ of traveling to new conference foes since our guys have had a year to see the A10 venues.
Its hard to just show up and kick someones ass when you have never set foot on their turf. I think 18-9 was not awesome, but pretty admirable- for a young team in the first year of a new conference. Its no different than playing a golf course the first time or shooting hoops in a new gym. The more comfortable you get in your environment, the better you play. [/QUOTE]
Iâll buy the âunknownsâ theory in that we were going to all new venues, but I canât buy the âitâs coldâ theory. You guys started playing games in February when it was sometimes too cold for football, and I know they still practice some in January when itâs even colder. I know going up to New York in April is quite different than being outdoors in Charlotte, but take a jacket and some sleeves so you can keep warm. Iâve never been up there either, but there are plenty of internet sites that can tell you what the weather will be like wherever youâre going to so youâll know what to wear.
[QUOTE=Brick Tamland, Weather;175115]
1a.) A number of teams underperformed relative to 2005 and hurt our RPI: Indiana (172 in 2005) is just 218 this season. Siena (155 in 2005) is just 208 this season. George Washington won 41 games a year ago but had some injuries early and are just 168th ⌠could have expected that to be higher (were 98th last year).
The only âdogsâ from 2005 on the schedule that we had control over were Appalachian (2) and Cleveland State (3). 7 âdogsâ out of 29 games isnât bad at all.
[/QUOTE]
That was my point. Even if Indiana and Siena had been up to last yearâs standards we still would not have had a Top 100 RPI given the same results as they were. I know we canât predict whoâs going to play well or who the sleeper teams are going into the season, but 95% of the time an SEC, ACC, or CUSA team is going to be better than a Big 10 or America East team. The cancellations hurt, but those were only single games anyways. Even with a win in both, our RPI wasnât going to jump tremendously. Therefore, schedule what you should know to be a better RPI series for non-conference opponents instead of 6 single games. George Washingtonâs season last year was much like ours this year. 41 wins against a #239 strength of schedule, and a #98 RPI. No wonder they had 41 wins.
GW just hit a home run in the top of the 17th against #1 Rhode Island ⌠the GW reliever entered in the 9th inning and has pitched 8 innings of relief ⌠heâll go for 9 straight innings in the bottom of the 17th to try to seal the win ⌠so #1 Rhody might be going home.
The whole thing with Siena and Indiana underperforming, obviously there are a number of factors. If the RPI now was 130, if they play 50 spots higher each ⌠thatâs going to go up. Look at the RPI right now, the 49ers are literally decimal places from the top 120 and could still move up if some of the teams ahead of them are still playing and lose âŚ
Itâs very easy to say âschedule ACC, SEC, etc.â but thatâs not the reality. Otherwise, Bobby could do the same thing in hoops. We all know thatâs not how it works. No ACC or SEC school is going to schedule a 3-game road trip to play AT Charlotte. If you want home games early in the year, you get Northern teams to come South. Sometimes, itâs about who will take your money, or the money youâre offering relative to other schools.
Itâs very simplistic to say âschedule betterâ because if you schedule a lot of top teams, and lose games to them, it doesnât help your RPI much more than wins vs. low RPI teams.
[QUOTE=Brick Tamland, Weather;175053]How is 35-20-1 not a good season? 63% winning percentage. If you can win over 30 games, youâre a good team. Couple breaks here or there, and youâre at 38 or 40 wins. Itâs not like basketball where your offense or defense predecates your winning ⌠coaching plays much more of a factor in other sports. In baseball, there is only so much you can do in-game to win the ballgames ⌠call for the hit and run, steals, pitching changes, etc. Players just have to perform, and judging by 4 unearned runs ⌠they didnât perform.[/QUOTE]
35-20 in college baseball is not a good season. Losing 9 games in the A-10 and finishing 4th is not a good season. Losing games to Lemoyne, Siena, NC A&T in non-conference games is not a good season. 0-2 in conference tourney is not a good season. Not making a regional is not a good season.
Put this team in Conference USA and they win less than 20 games. I know enough about college baseball to make this statement, so I donât need your hypothesis on what makes a good season.
Put this team in Conference USA and they win less than 20 games. I know enough about college baseball to make this statement, so I don't need your hypothesis on what makes a good season.
Actually, Iâll take you up on that. Trying explaining how virtually the same team that went 31-23 a year ago would win less than 20 games in Conference USA this year.
The team lost one player of note, Adam Willard, and had career years from numerous other players this year. If youâre telling me that Adam Willard is worth 12 wins from 2005 to 2006, then you donât know anything about college baseball (let alone âenoughâ to make that statement). And yes, I know that C-USA got arguably better this year than it was last year, but again, those two factors would not combine for 12 more losses.
No season can be truly âsuccessfulâ if you donât make the NCAA Tournament, since that is the goal every year. So on that basis, weâve only been successful 2 out of 28 years. Then again, most schools would have the same rate of success or even lower. âSuccessâ has to be defined by a number of different factors. Was it a âgoodâ year? Winning 35 games puts you in the upper % of college baseball teams, so Iâd say it was âgood.â Was it disappointing to some? Yes, but the 49ers did not vote themselves preseason favorites, the other 13 coaches did.
Itâs easy to point out that losing 9 games in the A-10 makes for a poor season, yet Saint Louis finished even behind the 49ers and ended up getting hot and winning the tournament, and will now be in the NCAAâs. I read something the other day about Vermont on a college baseball web site ⌠possibly having the lowest non-conference winning percentage in college baseball history but winning their league.
Success or failure? They achieved the goal. But most people would call that failure.
Itâs all subjective.
This team this year could have won 40 games and still wonât get an at large bid to a regional. Winning is easy when you play the type of schedule they play. They were 1-5 against solid competition (Charleston, Wake, NC, Winthrop).
St Louis was a bottom dweller in CUSA and they are going to a regional. 35 wins is a nice number, but with the competition we play it isnât going to get you into the post season.
[QUOTE=49erWhit;175250]This team this year could have won 40 games and still wonât get an at large bid to a regional. Winning is easy when you play the type of schedule they play. They were 1-5 against solid competition (Charleston, Wake, NC, Winthrop).
St Louis was a bottom dweller in CUSA and they are going to a regional. 35 wins is a nice number, but with the competition we play it isnât going to get you into the post season.[/QUOTE]
I think âgood seasonâ by everyone in this thread needs re-defined, and you all are comparing apples and oranges. 49erWhit played on the 98â team that won 42 games (which was the best season in UNCC history) and I think he has the bar raised a little high here. I played on the 95â team and we won 35 games (at the time the most ever in UNCC history), which this yearâs team equalled. Is 35 wins great for Clemson? Of course not, but it is good here, regardless of conference winning 2/3 is good.
I will also offer this: it is impossible to just become overnight a great program. I feel like my team in 95â trained freshman like Bo Robinson to want more and expect to win like they did in 98â, and I think this yearâs team has done the same to set a bar for the next couple years to take it further (especially with the stadium coming).
This yearâs team had a GOOD season, but not GREAT or spectacular year like 1998.