Cohen on Bo Bounds

[dawgs]

With what we have returning next year and expecting reasonable improvement from our freshmen, there's no excuse for Lemonis to not be competing for a National seed next season. None. Yeah that's high expectations, but we literally have a national championship contending team returning next year, and if we don't put ourselves in position to at least host a regional then that's a failure.

[gravedigger]

The issue is purely how could our AD not sell our program and it's significantly higher ceiling to guys at non-traditional powers who are still chasing their own natty, and imo that's a failure on cohen's part, plain and simple. Lemonis wins big and he's looks like a genius, but that doesn't mean he did a good job selling the program.

I'm not so sure he couldnt sell it per se, but that he had stipulations that they would not accept. While many might say that reveals a hard headedness that is costing us the big prize, I say it may be that he just isnt willing to compromise certain standards.

You are probably right that we could pay any price based on our history and current facilities. Still, if that is the case, they wouldnt come for some reason and we all know it is not related to the potential to win the National Championship. It must have to do with the way Cohen is framing the job for the incoming coach. If that is the case, I can wait for the immediate gratification of the NC because I think Cohen is building something longer lasting.

I do appreciate the frustration you are expresing. I was in the bullpup club in the late 70's and early 80's and it is long past time for us to have what we have certainly been unlucky not to have achieved. But that frustration has died down for me knowing we have the right man making the decision in our athletic department for all sports and this one in particular.

[gravedigger]

With what we have returning next year and expecting reasonable improvement from our freshmen, there's no excuse for Lemonis to not be competing for a National seed next season. None. Yeah that's high expectations, but we literally have a national championship contending team returning next year, and if we don't put ourselves in position to at least host a regional then that's a failure.

I agree wholeheartedly

[smootness]

With what we have returning next year and expecting reasonable improvement from our freshmen, there's no excuse for Lemonis to not be competing for a National seed next season. None. Yeah that's high expectations, but we literally have a national championship contending team returning next year, and if we don't put ourselves in position to at least host a regional then that's a failure.

I disagree with this. We certainly should be a good team, but there are way too many unknowns right now to say that. We still don't even know if we're going to have Small back, and even if we do, what else do we feel confident about in the rotation?

You also can't just expect any clear improvement from the freshmen. Baseball is a weird sport, look at Mangum as a sophomore. They should all still be at least roughly as good as they were this year, but being good as a freshman in no way guarantees that you'll then be even better as a sophomore, at least in terms of results.

ETA: I read your post a little too quickly initially. Yes, I agree that we should be able to at least compete to be a regional host. National seed? I have no idea. I thought you had said we should be competing for a national title (which I guess you basically did).

Anyway, there are just too many variables, certainly this far out. And while we turned it on at the end of the year, it was also the same team that looked terrible for the first half of the year. We can't be entirely certain of which of those teams was more real.

[dawgs]

You complain that we don't put ourselves in position while at the same time saying we are overdue.

Yes, we need to put ourselves in consistent position, that is the goal. Why you think that isn't the goal, I don't know. And I have news for you, Arkansas has been a clearly more successful program over the last 15 years than we have. So you can say they've already run off and left us behind if you want. What does it take to catch up and surpass other programs? The coach. And yes, I know this is your point. But there is no coach who will magically guarantee you a national title. The coaches we all wanted haven't even won one themselves. But it is nearly impossible to get a coach like that in college baseball. It just is. You think there is a sales formula whereby if you're good enough at selling, they will buy. But there is another person in this equation, the buyer. If they don't want to leave, there's nothing you can do.

Cohen got who he felt like was the best coach that was available who could get us to where you want to go. I'm not sure why you're angry.

We've underachieved relative our commitment to the program.

[smootness]

We've underachieved relative our commitment to the program.

I guess. But success is not determined by commitment to the program, that is my entire point.

[dawgs]

I guess. But success is not determined by commitment to the program, that is my entire point.

So then why spend the money on facilities if it doesn't matter? And that's part of my frustration, because commitment absolutely should be correlated with success more often than not, and pitching that correlation or the potential for the right coach to take our support and turn it into titles should be an easy sell imo, and that's been the whole point, it's not that anyone isn't going to support Lemonis (what choice do we have?), it's that we think the job should be more marketable and that comes down to the guy selling it not doing the strongest job of conveying the potential and the path to reaching that potential to the guys he's offering the job to.

[BrunswickDawg]

We've underachieved relative our commitment to the program.

No, we haven't. We have been in the post season 32 times over the past 40 years. That means that we have consistently put ourselves in a position to win a national title - which is our goal every season and all you can really ask of your program. It is shear dumb luck that we haven't won a title yet. We had the best teams in college baseball history in '83 -'85 and couldn't do it. Our 2013 team might rival it because of the quantity of talent and that group couldn't do it. Brent Rooker and Buck Showalter having unique, one of a kind seasons at the plate couldn't get us there. The reality is that tournaments - while fun - are one of the most random ways to decide a national title. And in a sport like baseball where a singular player - the pitcher - can randomly dictate the outcome of a game by having the balls-out day of his life - it's terrible and frustrating. And it has only gotten harder over the past 20 years to do it. You won't ever see runs like USC, or LSU dominating a decade of titles again. You think without the commitment to the program we would have been to those 32 postseasons? No, we would be Indiana.

[smootness]

So then why spend the money on facilities if it doesn't matter? And that's part of my frustration, because commitment absolutely should be correlated with success more often than not, and pitching that correlation or the potential for the right coach to take our support and turn it into titles should be an easy sell imo, and that's been the whole point, it's not that anyone isn't going to support Lemonis (what choice do we have?), it's that we think the job should be more marketable and that comes down to the guy selling it not doing the strongest job of conveying the potential and the path to reaching that potential to the guys he's offering the job to.

Well, I guess I should clarify. Success seems to be tied more to coaching than to anything else, including fan support, facilities, etc. Now, sure, support and resources should be correlated to the ease of finding and keeping a good coach, but college baseball is a weird animal. Coaches seem far more content to stay where they are in baseball than in other sports. That's still relative, as a program generally needs to at least be in a power conference to be able to retain a great coach, but as long as the school is willing to begin supporting the sport once they start seeing success, it is very difficult to pry a coach from a program they've built, no matter who you are.

Look at a school like Texas. Just a stupid amount of success, plenty of fan support, all the resources you want, and while their stadium isn't as good as ours will be, it's still near the top of the sport. They weren't able to pry Schlossnagle, either. They had to go get David Pierce, who is a promising coach but only had 5 years of HC experience and 0 in a major conference; he'd never been to a SR. But he was promising enough that a school like Baylor probably couldn't have pulled him. Similarly, it likely would have been much tougher for a school like Missouri to pull Lemonis.

Support and resources do give you a higher floor and a higher ceiling, I think. So if Pierce turns out to be elite, for example, he'll blow the roof off at Texas, just like an elite coach would do here. And if he turns out to be mediocre, they'll still be a good program that is more up and down, just like here. So there's more wiggle room and more potential, but it doesn't guarantee you anything, even finding an established coach.

Watch what Florida State does. I can pretty much guarantee you they won't be pulling a McDonnell, Schlossnagle, or Corbin. We apparently came about as close as you can come to prying one of those guys, but even we weren't able to do it. It's just not really an option in college baseball.

[Tbonewannabe]

Well, I guess I should clarify. Success seems to be tied more to coaching than to anything else, including fan support, facilities, etc. Now, sure, support and resources should be correlated to the ease of finding and keeping a good coach, but college baseball is a weird animal. Coaches seem far more content to stay where they are in baseball than in other sports. That's still relative, as a program generally needs to at least be in a power conference to be able to retain a great coach, but as long as the school is willing to begin supporting the sport once they start seeing success, it is very difficult to pry a coach from a program they've built, no matter who you are.

Look at a school like Texas. Just a stupid amount of success, plenty of fan support, all the resources you want, and while their stadium isn't as good as ours will be, it's still near the top of the sport. They weren't able to pry Schlossnagle, either. They had to go get David Pierce, who is a promising coach but only had 5 years of HC experience and 0 in a major conference; he'd never been to a SR.

Support and resources do give you a higher floor and a higher ceiling, I think. So if Pierce turns out to be elite, for example, he'll blow the roof off at Texas, just like an elite coach would do here. And if he turns out to be mediocre, they'll still be a good program that is more up and down, just like here. So there's more wiggle room and more potential, but it doesn't guarantee you anything, even finding an established coach.

Watch what Florida State does. I can pretty much guarantee you they won't be pulling a McDonnell, Schlossnagle, or Corbin. We apparently came about as close as you can come to prying one of those guys, but even we weren't able to do it. It's just not really an option in college baseball.

The coach at Coastal Carolina has been there forever and has been going to Regionals almost every year for about 20 years. He has been to 3 Super Regionals since 2008, 2008,2010, and 2016. He also won a National Title. This guy is extremely successful but is still at Coastal Carolina. You can't tell me that a big program hasn't gauged his interest but he is still there. Baseball coaches don't change jobs often.

[dawgs]

No, we haven't. We have been in the post season 32 times over the past 40 years. That means that we have consistently put ourselves in a position to win a national title - which is our goal every season and all you can really ask of your program. It is shear dumb luck that we haven't won a title yet. We had the best teams in college baseball history in '83 -'85 and couldn't do it. Our 2013 team might rival it because of the quantity of talent and that group couldn't do it. Brent Rooker and Buck Showalter having unique, one of a kind seasons at the plate couldn't get us there. The reality is that tournaments - while fun - are one of the most random ways to decide a national title. And in a sport like baseball where a singular player - the pitcher - can randomly dictate the outcome of a game by having the balls-out day of his life - it's terrible and frustrating. And it has only gotten harder over the past 20 years to do it. You won't ever see runs like USC, or LSU dominating a decade of titles again. You think without the commitment to the program we would have been to those 32 postseasons? No, we would be Indiana.

We haven't hosted enough in the super regional era to really say we've put ourselves in the best position to win a CWS or had our on field production match our commitment to the program. Traveling as a 2 seed to someone else's regional far more often than hosting isn't a sustainable way to win a title. Sure you can get hot at the right time some years, but you are much better off consistently winning 40+ and hosting. That means you are good, not getting hot at the right time. One is sustainable and one is not. Plus we have the best home field advantage in the country, that's a huge benefit if we are hosting regionals and supers.

[Tbonewannabe]

We haven't hosted enough in the super regional era to really say we've put ourselves in the best position to win a CWS or had our on field production match our commitment to the program. Traveling as a 2 seed to someone else's regional far more often than hosting isn't a sustainable way to win a title. Sure you can get hot at the right time some years, but you are much better off consistently winning 40+ and hosting. That means you are good, not getting hot at the right time. One is sustainable and one is not. Plus we have the best home field advantage in the country, that's a huge benefit if we are hosting regionals and supers.

You can look at Omaha almost every year. The teams who host Regionals and or Supers are a lot more likely to make it. We did luck up some with Vandy knocking off Clemson and we definitely benefited with Washington making it. We have to get back to consistently hosting Regionals. It is a lot easier than hoping you get hot at the right time.

[dawgs]

You can look at Omaha almost every year. The teams who host Regionals and or Supers are a lot more likely to make it. We did luck up some with Vandy knocking off Clemson and we definitely benefited with Washington making it. We have to get back to consistently hosting Regionals. It is a lot easier than hoping you get hot at the right time.

Yep. We should be hosting about 50% of the time, and a National seed about 25% of the time. Those expectations aren't that unreasonable imo.

[smootness]

Wanna know something crazy? (This is not meant to make an actual point, it's obviously better to be a national seed and consistently hosting than not, just a crazy weird observation)

From 2004-2016, the national title was won by a top 8 seed twice.

That is nuts.

[msstate7]

Wanna know something crazy? (This is not meant to make an actual point, it's obviously better to be a national seed and consistently hosting than not, just a crazy weird observation)

From 2004-2016, the national title was won by a top 8 seed twice.

That is nuts.

2 in a row now though

[BrunswickDawg]

We haven't hosted enough in the super regional era to really say we've put ourselves in the best position to win a CWS or had our on field production match our commitment to the program. Traveling as a 2 seed to someone else's regional far more often than hosting isn't a sustainable way to win a title. Sure you can get hot at the right time some years, but you are much better off consistently winning 40+ and hosting. That means you are good, not getting hot at the right time. One is sustainable and one is not. Plus we have the best home field advantage in the country, that's a huge benefit if we are hosting regionals and supers.

Hosting puts you in the best position - no doubt. And I think that should he a goal for every season. But, playing in the SEC has a major impact on our ability to do so. Continually putting 8-10 teams into the post season and the need to spread regionals around the country, combined with SEC fatigue all stack the deck. The years of having 6 SEC based regionals will be rare - if it ever happens again. Even Vandy - which I consider the premier program over the past 15 years - has only hosted 5 times in the Super Regional era. That's 1 more then us. Even UF had to host 8 times in the Supers era before they broke thru and won a title. And is it that much of an advantage to host when you have FSU hosting 35 times and not winning a title? We have also advanced to the Supers 5 times going on the road to do it. We've only made to the Supers 3 out of 4 season when we have hosted.

ETA - seeing your other post of hosting 50% of the time and Supers 25% is I think a reasonable expectation. That's close to what we are right now. If we host next year we will be at 50% for the past 6 years. If we then host a Super, we will have hosted 2 in 4 years

[Todd4State]

No, we haven't. We have been in the post season 32 times over the past 40 years. That means that we have consistently put ourselves in a position to win a national title - which is our goal every season and all you can really ask of your program. It is shear dumb luck that we haven't won a title yet. We had the best teams in college baseball history in '83 -'85 and couldn't do it. Our 2013 team might rival it because of the quantity of talent and that group couldn't do it. Brent Rooker and Buck Showalter having unique, one of a kind seasons at the plate couldn't get us there. The reality is that tournaments - while fun - are one of the most random ways to decide a national title. And in a sport like baseball where a singular player - the pitcher - can randomly dictate the outcome of a game by having the balls-out day of his life - it's terrible and frustrating. And it has only gotten harder over the past 20 years to do it. You won't ever see runs like USC, or LSU dominating a decade of titles again. You think without the commitment to the program we would have been to those 32 postseasons? No, we would be Indiana.

The reality is what gives you the best chance to win a National Title is coaches that can recruit and develop at a high level. Look at the teams that have won recently- Florida and Vanderbilt. The reason those teams have won at a high level despite not having the commitment and facilities and fan support that we do is because they have coaches that have scouting connections that can recruit and develop players- especially pitchers- at a high level. Recently LSU and Arkansas can fall in that category as well- and Arkansas still may win one this year. Oregon State this year has four first round picks and a pitcher that probably would have been a 1-2 had it not been for his criminal history. And sure there are Coastal Carolina's that get hot at the right time and things work out- but Coastal Carolina will always be a mid major just like Pepperdine and Fresno State and not a consistent player in Omaha. And obviously the more you make it to Omaha the better your chances are.


Our 1985 team had how many MLB players on it? Between 1976 and 1990 we were recruiting at an elite level but SEC baseball was not what it is today and the league was still growing. West Coast and Texas baseball was still dominant at that time along with Wichita State and Miami. But the reason we started to underachieve was because of the decisions MSU made around that time which were not conducive to us taking the next step.


Circa 1991- We begged Ron Polk to not retire. Our recruiting suffered after 79-1990 was our best run in school history.

Circa 1994- We did the coach in waiting thing with Pat McMahon who was considered a good coach but not an elite coach. Because that's who Ron Polk wanted. We haul in the top class in 1994- but we didn't surround that class with other top 10 classes. So, we made it to Omaha twice with those recruits as the centerpiece of those teams and added in some key transfers for 1998 like Lotterhos and Cliff Wren to fill in gaps from the draft. Long term wasn't sustainable to win a National Title though.


2001- McMahon leaves because he was not Ron Polk and tired of hearing about it. But instead of hiring Paul Manieri we bring Ron Polk back. We decline over seven years and eventually the bottom fell out in 2008. We are now up to about 18 years of non-elite recruiting and player development by the end of Polk's tenure.


2008- We hire John Cohen who was an elite hire. But he inherits a train wreck and by this time Ole Miss and USM decide that they want to be good and care about baseball too- so now Cohen has to deal with our fans and two in state schools that hate him. Finally in 2011 he cobbles together a team that is good enough to make a SR and we finally start to have success and rebuild our program with results showing. We still aren't recruiting at quite the elite level we need to yet- but we're starting to make strides. 2013 team has five players on it that contributed that have become MLB players- Holder, Girodo, Graveman, Frazier, and Renfroe. And two more in Lindgren who hadn't found his niche and Woodruff who was hurt and with a healthy Woodruff I like our odds a little bit better against UCLA. Around 2015 Cohen gets burned out and wants to be the AD and steps down in 2016 after winning the SEC.


2016- We hire Cann who had the background to be an elite recruiter and could develop hitters at the level we needed. Cann's immaturity gets him fired in 2018. Henderson takes over in the interim and we have a good year.


So- in a nutshell we haven't had the coach or situation to recruit and develop like we needed to for almost 30 years now. That's why we have underachieved. Because when Polk was doing it the SEC wasn't quite at the competition level we needed it to be for us to be elite in Omaha either. That has changed. I think Lemonis has the potential to recruit like that and with Gautreau and an elite pitching coach he has the potential to develop at that level for us. And it could be quickly because we aren't a rebuild. That's why it's important that we are 100% behind him. Cohen understands college baseball and he sees the environment that everyone is having success in. That's why he rolled the dice on Cann and why he hired a guy that is considered one of the best recruiters in the game this time around. And also why he wanted Gautreau to stay on as hitting coach.


I think we can win a National Championship here in baseball but it HAS TO be done a certain way and there are no shortcuts. But we've really only started to go down that path to doing things the right way as far as recruiting for the past ten years or so and in that time we've had to deal with what amounts to a two year transition which is finally coming to an end now. Our hitting is good enough as far as development goes at this time- but if we can improve our pitching development and tighten up our defense a little bit- and a tighten it up a lot at catcher- we will probably take the next step in 10 years or less.

[Todd4State]

We haven't hosted enough in the super regional era to really say we've put ourselves in the best position to win a CWS or had our on field production match our commitment to the program. Traveling as a 2 seed to someone else's regional far more often than hosting isn't a sustainable way to win a title. Sure you can get hot at the right time some years, but you are much better off consistently winning 40+ and hosting. That means you are good, not getting hot at the right time. One is sustainable and one is not. Plus we have the best home field advantage in the country, that's a huge benefit if we are hosting regionals and supers.

I think with us hosting probably gives us a little more advantage than some other teams. In 2007 our crowd was a big reason why we won that SR IMO. Plus it helps with recruiting because the two times people probably watch college baseball the most is during SR weekend and CWS week. That and things like Thunder and Lightning help spread MSU baseball across the country.

[preachermatt83]

Our expectation EVERY year should be the same.... host a regional, get to a super and after that so many different things are at play that you can say ok, every year we have to go to Omaha. Any year we do not host a regional and get to a super should be considered a disappointment but getting to a super should be considered a good year. Now what about Omaha? Well if you go to super regionals regularly you are gonna spend a good bit of time in Omaha.

[Todd4State]

Our expectation EVERY year should be the same.... host a regional, get to a super and after that so many different things are at play that you can say ok, every year we have to go to Omaha. Any year we do not host a regional and get to a super should be considered a disappointment but getting to a super should be considered a good year. Now what about Omaha? Well if you go to super regionals regularly you are gonna spend a good bit of time in Omaha.

My minimum expectation for us is a SR and to win the Governor's Cup. If we make a SR, we are getting television exposure during the biggest weeks of the college baseball season. And as you said if you go to enough SR's you will go to Omaha a fair amount of times.